Perhaps we should all cancel our Google+ accounts, stating that we do it because: 1. We strongly disagree with the policy that makes our entire Google account for all services disappear for just breaking Google+ policy 2. (optional) We disagree with the policy that we shouldn't be able to use a pseudonym on Google+ 3. We disagree with having to provide an identification or other proof for our names - this should be required only for a kind of a light version of a verified account
What's worse: The article says less than the obvious can go. It doesn't say anything about the effect of jumps between scenes of different depth, about stereo strobbing effects that appear when using a small frame rate, the straining effects of overly dark 3D displays in some cinemas, etc.
And with so little people you can't correlate personal characteristics of the viewers with the strain and headaches - I'm a sensitive person, and I get headaches from watching a normal cinema from too close or from an unusual angle, from watching a LCD monitor when the other lights are out, from using a closeup display (e.g. cellphone) in a moving vehicle, and I don't have any issue with 3D unless some exacerbating effects are present as well, which in my case would be dark picture or the screen being too close.
The announcement that DNF was going to be released caused mass panic. The Debian Hurd team assembled on an emergency meeting, the devil begin to order truckloads of dry ice, suddenly wings began to appear on cars and pigs. Only Apple got lucky and the panic didn't get to them. Thankfully, they started using Intel CPUs a long long time ago.
A seasoned hacker will break your security with little effort. What about the disks with durable encryption that lasts for millennia with keys taken by recording data from pulsars?
These figures should be multiplied by the factor of seriousness of the researches in the field. And this is space exploration we're talking about. That factor is huge.
So I gather you're happy with breast implants for newborns?
Newborns can't give consent to have parts of their body permanently cut off or permanently changed, performing such dangerous and irreversible procedures on them is unacceptable, and insisting on doing them regardless should call for a psychological examination.
The question is, should we fight against all our exceptions in that matter? What if, for example, I have a mental illness that manifests itself in a unbearable fear to remove my hat? Should I be forced to remove it for my license photos? Now, what if a part of those religious people do feel the same thing, because of their religion? Sure, it's easy for a hat -- allow all hats that don't cover the face.
Consider a Muslim woman who's wearing whatever that thing is called. It covers her head, and a part of her cheeks, so it doesn't hinder recognition of her face, but it does make it a bit more difficult. For a Muslim woman who is insisting on that, she'll always wear it, so wherever you see her, she would look exactly the same if she wears it, and she will look different if she doesn't. Moreover, if she's insisting on wearing it, it's probably important for her, and forcing her not to would be invasion. A little one, but still.
How about allowing people to wear stuff on their license photos if they: 1. Don't prevent recognition of the face and don't make it too difficult 2. They wear them all the time 3. They go through a small psychological evaluation that confirms that it is very important for them to wear them (religious, just crazy, are hiding shameful scars, or whatever reason). If this is not true, ask them to remove their ornamentation to make recognition of them easier.
Many SPAM detection techniques also "read" your e-mail and store information about the contents. You could argue that merely storing and rendering the e-mail for you does the same. What you need is a guarantee that this information isn't sent to third parties or read by the employees.
...but I wouldn't use a webmail service that doesn't have a SPAM filtering system.
Every time when you are entrusting your mails to a third-party, they can abuse it, whether the terms of service say so or not. Even if the company doesn't, some of the employees might, unless the database is designed in such way that no employee can access it. All you have is their word that they won't use the information stored there.
They have your data, and all you have is their word (and probably unenforcible legal responsibility), and you have trouble with the fact that they are analysing the incoming mails to protect your mailbox from SPAM?
If privacy mattered that much: 1. You wouldn't use a third-party for your emails 2. You would use PGP/GPG to encrypt your correspondence 3. You'd ask your correspondents to not use webmail either
Until then, you can't really complain unless there is any evidence that they abused their access to your data or that they added terms that allow them to abuse it.
And no, targeted advertising is not abuse, although it's another vector that can be used for abuse. But the main vector is that you gave your data to someone else.
And I forgot to add something that's probably even more important.
It's not understanding, because quite honestly we don't understand anything. If it was understanding, we would be in constant panic. It's something unusual and unexpected, different enough that our instincts and/or experience can't cope with it, things that you need to understand to grasp. You don't need to understand how a fountain pen works to use one and understand all intricacies, at worst you could fear that the ink could be poison. But you need to understand a train to know what would happen if you are accelerated to that speed or if the train suddenly crashes. You know, if you don't understand it, flying uteri suddenly appear all over the place.
Fear of planes? It's not about understanding how the plane works, but our gut feeling can't cope when there isn't something like a road holding the plane. If you don't understand how air lift works, all planes would seem to be falling unless you've gotten used to flying.
There is lack of understanding, and there is also fear of a big change, fear of losing the status quo. And the bigger the change, the bigger the fear.
Now, I'm just speculating (like the author of the article is doing), but I'd say that fear of the actions of other people has the biggest impact. New technology makes everyone powerful. It makes you powerful, but it also makes everyone else powerful. If there is a railway, your daughter might take the railway and go to some dangerous place, or your wife might take it and never come back.
I'm certain that technologies like the fountain pen caused fear in many circles, just like the FM radio and file sharing, it's simply not the regular people. Why? Maybe because when these technologies appeared, there were other people who could already do these things, the only thing that has changed is that now you can. And maybe because it wasn't a big change, just a new technology that allows something existing to be used by more people -- the FM radio was just an extension over the radio technology, and file sharing was just an extension over the Internet.
Change in space and time? I don't know what that means. It sounds like something that might be connected to the panic, but it is to vague. But I still think it is the unknown and the change in power.
Now that's just wrong, software should be versioned using powers of two. I always compile my own Firefox changing the version to 10384593717069655257060992658440192 manually in the source.
Awful ruling, but I'd have less problem with my spouse tracking me than the police doing it. And I could divorce my spouse, while I can't do that with the police.
Re:lim sin(x)/x = 1, when x-0
on
Happy Tau Day
·
· Score: 1
This doesn't redefine the radian. It simply changes the way you write it down.
Slashdot Mirror
It's very extremely illegal, but it doesn't appear to be working. Perhaps someone should copyright the phrase?
Perhaps we should all cancel our Google+ accounts, stating that we do it because:
1. We strongly disagree with the policy that makes our entire Google account for all services disappear for just breaking Google+ policy
2. (optional) We disagree with the policy that we shouldn't be able to use a pseudonym on Google+
3. We disagree with having to provide an identification or other proof for our names - this should be required only for a kind of a light version of a verified account
What's worse: The article says less than the obvious can go. It doesn't say anything about the effect of jumps between scenes of different depth, about stereo strobbing effects that appear when using a small frame rate, the straining effects of overly dark 3D displays in some cinemas, etc.
And with so little people you can't correlate personal characteristics of the viewers with the strain and headaches - I'm a sensitive person, and I get headaches from watching a normal cinema from too close or from an unusual angle, from watching a LCD monitor when the other lights are out, from using a closeup display (e.g. cellphone) in a moving vehicle, and I don't have any issue with 3D unless some exacerbating effects are present as well, which in my case would be dark picture or the screen being too close.
Come on! Adobe Flash has always been slow, that's a massive improvement!
The announcement that DNF was going to be released caused mass panic. The Debian Hurd team assembled on an emergency meeting, the devil begin to order truckloads of dry ice, suddenly wings began to appear on cars and pigs. Only Apple got lucky and the panic didn't get to them. Thankfully, they started using Intel CPUs a long long time ago.
Thanks to its microkernel architecture, Hurd is completely stable and never needs a reboot, so the three Hurd users are no longer a treat to China.
A seasoned hacker will break your security with little effort. What about the disks with durable encryption that lasts for millennia with keys taken by recording data from pulsars?
Hey, I'd rather share my personal information with a random anonymous vigilante than with that Mark Zuckerberg guy!
These figures should be multiplied by the factor of seriousness of the researches in the field. And this is space exploration we're talking about. That factor is huge.
Of course there are Star Trek fans, it's just that we all hate Voyager.
So I gather you're happy with breast implants for newborns?
Newborns can't give consent to have parts of their body permanently cut off or permanently changed, performing such dangerous and irreversible procedures on them is unacceptable, and insisting on doing them regardless should call for a psychological examination.
The question is, should we fight against all our exceptions in that matter? What if, for example, I have a mental illness that manifests itself in a unbearable fear to remove my hat? Should I be forced to remove it for my license photos? Now, what if a part of those religious people do feel the same thing, because of their religion? Sure, it's easy for a hat -- allow all hats that don't cover the face.
Consider a Muslim woman who's wearing whatever that thing is called. It covers her head, and a part of her cheeks, so it doesn't hinder recognition of her face, but it does make it a bit more difficult. For a Muslim woman who is insisting on that, she'll always wear it, so wherever you see her, she would look exactly the same if she wears it, and she will look different if she doesn't. Moreover, if she's insisting on wearing it, it's probably important for her, and forcing her not to would be invasion. A little one, but still.
How about allowing people to wear stuff on their license photos if they:
1. Don't prevent recognition of the face and don't make it too difficult
2. They wear them all the time
3. They go through a small psychological evaluation that confirms that it is very important for them to wear them (religious, just crazy, are hiding shameful scars, or whatever reason).
If this is not true, ask them to remove their ornamentation to make recognition of them easier.
I'd say this will be fair.
The question is why don't they do the same psychiatric evaluation on Jews who mutilate children penises?
Many SPAM detection techniques also "read" your e-mail and store information about the contents. You could argue that merely storing and rendering the e-mail for you does the same. What you need is a guarantee that this information isn't sent to third parties or read by the employees.
...but I wouldn't use a webmail service that doesn't have a SPAM filtering system.
Every time when you are entrusting your mails to a third-party, they can abuse it, whether the terms of service say so or not. Even if the company doesn't, some of the employees might, unless the database is designed in such way that no employee can access it. All you have is their word that they won't use the information stored there.
They have your data, and all you have is their word (and probably unenforcible legal responsibility), and you have trouble with the fact that they are analysing the incoming mails to protect your mailbox from SPAM?
If privacy mattered that much:
1. You wouldn't use a third-party for your emails
2. You would use PGP/GPG to encrypt your correspondence
3. You'd ask your correspondents to not use webmail either
Until then, you can't really complain unless there is any evidence that they abused their access to your data or that they added terms that allow them to abuse it.
And no, targeted advertising is not abuse, although it's another vector that can be used for abuse. But the main vector is that you gave your data to someone else.
And I forgot to add something that's probably even more important.
It's not understanding, because quite honestly we don't understand anything. If it was understanding, we would be in constant panic. It's something unusual and unexpected, different enough that our instincts and/or experience can't cope with it, things that you need to understand to grasp. You don't need to understand how a fountain pen works to use one and understand all intricacies, at worst you could fear that the ink could be poison. But you need to understand a train to know what would happen if you are accelerated to that speed or if the train suddenly crashes. You know, if you don't understand it, flying uteri suddenly appear all over the place.
Fear of planes? It's not about understanding how the plane works, but our gut feeling can't cope when there isn't something like a road holding the plane. If you don't understand how air lift works, all planes would seem to be falling unless you've gotten used to flying.
It's not that simple, it's not one thing.
There is lack of understanding, and there is also fear of a big change, fear of losing the status quo. And the bigger the change, the bigger the fear.
Now, I'm just speculating (like the author of the article is doing), but I'd say that fear of the actions of other people has the biggest impact. New technology makes everyone powerful. It makes you powerful, but it also makes everyone else powerful. If there is a railway, your daughter might take the railway and go to some dangerous place, or your wife might take it and never come back.
I'm certain that technologies like the fountain pen caused fear in many circles, just like the FM radio and file sharing, it's simply not the regular people. Why? Maybe because when these technologies appeared, there were other people who could already do these things, the only thing that has changed is that now you can. And maybe because it wasn't a big change, just a new technology that allows something existing to be used by more people -- the FM radio was just an extension over the radio technology, and file sharing was just an extension over the Internet.
Change in space and time? I don't know what that means. It sounds like something that might be connected to the panic, but it is to vague. But I still think it is the unknown and the change in power.
Now that's just wrong, software should be versioned using powers of two. I always compile my own Firefox changing the version to 10384593717069655257060992658440192 manually in the source.
No, no you got it wrong, Firefox 8 = Firefox 5 + Firefox 3. It will be released together with Firefox 8.7 (Firefox 8 + Firebird 0.7)
I say arrest those cable pirates stealing HDMI connectors without paying for them.
You're doing it wrong, Russell...
Good job calling people who fight for your freedoms "assholes".
It's awful because someone didn't read the summary, but hey, when was reading the summary a requirement for posting here?
Awful ruling, but I'd have less problem with my spouse tracking me than the police doing it. And I could divorce my spouse, while I can't do that with the police.
This doesn't redefine the radian. It simply changes the way you write it down.