Considering you can easily pay off a card if you simply pay more than the minimum, or pay early, it's not nearly the same situation. These folks are legally bound to produce for the recording industry, and everything they produce that's worth anything is owned forever by the same industry.
I wasn't aware of the Courtney Love letter. That was an amazing read (many thanks). That begs the second question. Why haven't I heard of this letter before? The RIAA is an evil beyond typical corporate scams and money making. They have fingers in world wide political pies, and money to literally burn. The fact that a single group can exert so much power in political circles should be a huge wake up call to everyone, yet year by year goes by and only the 'geeks' and those affected voice their concerns. I think what's even more frightening is that they now do these things opening for the most part, and again no one pays attention.
Slavery was abolished in the US, yet I don't see how these contracts differ in any significant way from slavery and servitude.
That's exactly how it works. Unfortunately, the article makes a few (ok, a lot) of very bad assumptions (how many times can you use Assume and Estimate in a story?). They used a very popular app that 'phones home' as their yardstick, and then applied that yardstick to every app purchased in the store, all the way down to the dregs like the fart apps. Although copyright infringement on popular apps may indeed be that high, I find it very hard to give this credibility that every app in the store would have an 75% infringement rate.
"Assuming the proportion of those that are paid falls in the middle of the Bernstein estimate"
At least one of these folks should have been able to tell when they were being affected, yet none of them have been able to do so consistently, ergo they are guessing.
I'm not saying man can't evolve the ability to detect electromagnetic, but obviously that hasn't happened yet.
Why these 'allergic' cases are so willing to simply disregard double blind study results and continue to believe they are 'special' should be something to look at in and of itself.
"31 is a good number of studies, and 24 found that electromagnetic fields have no effect. But 7 did find some measurable effect, and because I have a reputation for pedantry to uphold: in 2 of those studies with positive findings, even the original authors have been unable to replicate the results; for the next 3, the results seem to be statistical artifacts (details below); and for the final 2, the positive results are mutually inconsistent (one shows improved mood with provocation, and the other shows worsened mood)."
There comes a point when both the doctors involved, and society at large need to consider that someone is more likely to simply be a hypochondriac, a head case, or misdiagnosed.
Apparently this storage option is only available in Test Mode according to TFA, and only that mode allows the storage of images.
From TFA: " A TSA official who spoke on condition of anonymity because the official is not authorized to speak on the record said all full-body scanners have "strong privacy protections in place" and are delivered to airports 'without the capability to store, print or transmit images.' "
"There is no way for someone in the airport environment to put the machine into the test mode," the official said, adding that test mode can be enabled only in TSA test facilities. But the official declined to say whether activating test mode requires additional hardware, software or simply additional knowledge of how the machines operate."
"Further, the TSA says, the machines are not networked and cannot be hacked."
"The TSA officer viewing the image cannot see the actual passenger. No cameras, cell phones or other devices capable of capturing an image are allowed in the room where the image is displayed, according to the TSA. The agency adds that images are deleted from the system after the operator reviews them. And employees who misuse the machines are subject to serious discipline or removal."
I happen to think this is more media trying to feed the frenzy and grab ratings. The whole idea about privacy in an airport is stupid IMO. They can already go through your bag and find any private items that you like to take on your Bahama vacation. This illusion of privacy at an airport is just that. The scanners are necessary and would hopefully eliminate a lot of stupidity that passengers and the TSA must go through in the security checkpoints. Any pink bits that some person has, will look just like the pink bits from the other hundreds or thousands of people that pass through the scanner that day. Unless your John Holmes, I doubt anyone would be impressed or horrified. From what I saw, you end up with this weird metal looking skin, with no easy way to identify the person in the image in any case.
Who cares if they can see your dick, fat rolls, or tits on a metal skinned image that doesn't even resemble a human?
Note, the images from the following link may not be considered as work safe as they depict weird sort of android nudity with full junkage:
Actually this is more of a problem on sites that don't offer a mobile version. Forum for instance, often use 'page numbers' at the bottom of a long forum list to break up those posts over X number of pages so you end up with something like this at the bottom of a forum post indicating various 'pages' to the discussion:
1 2 3 4 5 6 7...
Clicking such small links can be a challenge on a smart phone.
Yes and no. It's just a cost trade-off. If the average contact surface for a 'light touch' finger on a capacitive screen is 2 millimeters (just an example as I don't know what the real average contact surface size is), then it wouldn't make much sense to have a resolution of.25 mm as you wouldn't need that fine of a resolution. If the grid points are too far apart so that only two points, or even worse, one point is activated, the drawn line will take a drastic turn to correct where it next sees your finger contact.
What we're seeing in these tests is the actual grid pattern for each of the grid points (a grid point being where these phones are able to 'see' a sensor result). The stairstep pattern is simply what happens when a finger is in between sensor points, or possibly only activating 1, 2 or 3 of the 4 sensor points that make up a 'square'. Think of these points as good old fashioned grid paper, with each sensor point being a corner of a square on that graph paper. If you have a finger press that activates 3 of the 4 corners, then it makes sense that the software should not put your finger 'click' exactly in the center of the 4 points, but rather in the center of the 3 points that are activated. It's basically just using the points where it 'sees' a finger and then finding the center of that click.
Make the grid too low resolution, and you end up with a stair step pattern, just as you see when you try to represent a straight diagonal line at a very low resolution. It appears the software tries to mitigate this by averaging the values so you don't see an perfect stair step pattern, but the stair pattern is definitely there.
It reflects resolution, and shows 'dead spots' in the touch surface that the OS/Software must 'guess' as to approximate location. Granted it's not a very scientific test, but it does show some interesting weaknesses in the varous implementations. For instance, on an iPhone, you can click on a link that is only a few pixels in height and be relatively sure you'll get the correct link out of a list of links.
If you'll think back to the days of low resolution, when you were trying to fit a decent image into a 16x16 icon representation, you get an idea of what this may be showing. If the touch capacitance screen doesn't have a grid address for a specific spot you're trying to touch, it will have to guess between the two nearest points.
This is very similar to mouse resolution.
A more valid test would be to use a 'robotic' finger that could apply exact pressure across all phones, but it does give a decent general idea as to how they stack up.
The idea is that you can convert any display into a WiDi. The monitor isn't wireless. At least not yet anyway. Right now you hook up a box which looks like a wireless router to your TV or display device. It snags the WiDi signal and pipes it out to your display via HDMI.
So you feel the needs of the one, outweigh the needs of the many? The masks are not uncomfortable. I wear one when doing the lawn to control my allergies.
I don't know about anyone else, but this insane bean counting has driven all semblance of enjoyment out of my job. I'm salaried of course, but I must still report my day in 15 minute increments, use archaic micromanagement tools for every aspect of everything I do as if I'm some sort of consultant who is billing back time. I'm reporting my time in no less than 3 different tools, and in some cases, up to 6.
What happened to IT that they've embraced micromanagement on such an asinine scale?
Sorry about that. According to the Atmospheric Vortex Engine link, it also uses convection.
From the first line of the link:
"Mechanical energy is produced when heat is carried upward by convection in the atmosphere."
and a little further down:
"Heating the air within the wall using a temporary heat source such as steam starts the vortex. The heat required to sustain the vortex once established can be the natural heat content of warm humid air or can be provided in cooling towers located outside of the cylindrical wall and upstream of the deflectors."
Ever gotten into a sealed car on a hot summer day? Same idea. The air within the tower will be heated by the greenhouse. The heat will rise, pulling cooler air in from the base using convection.
"Hence, an improved Maximum Likelihood Sequence Estimation, such as for an optical disc reader, would be advantageous and in particular a system allowing for increased flexibility, reduced complexity, reduced computational resource demand, increased applicability and/or improved performance would be advantageous."
Actually he was convicted of 1 of the three counts of impeachment but later acquitted by the Senate. He left office with the highest rating of any president since World War 2.
Slashdot Mirror
Considering you can easily pay off a card if you simply pay more than the minimum, or pay early, it's not nearly the same situation. These folks are legally bound to produce for the recording industry, and everything they produce that's worth anything is owned forever by the same industry.
How does that compare?
And when the organization being sued is writing the very legislation that allows their actions? What then?
I wasn't aware of the Courtney Love letter. That was an amazing read (many thanks). That begs the second question. Why haven't I heard of this letter before? The RIAA is an evil beyond typical corporate scams and money making. They have fingers in world wide political pies, and money to literally burn. The fact that a single group can exert so much power in political circles should be a huge wake up call to everyone, yet year by year goes by and only the 'geeks' and those affected voice their concerns. I think what's even more frightening is that they now do these things opening for the most part, and again no one pays attention.
Slavery was abolished in the US, yet I don't see how these contracts differ in any significant way from slavery and servitude.
Why is this allowed to go on?
That's exactly how it works. Unfortunately, the article makes a few (ok, a lot) of very bad assumptions (how many times can you use Assume and Estimate in a story?). They used a very popular app that 'phones home' as their yardstick, and then applied that yardstick to every app purchased in the store, all the way down to the dregs like the fart apps. Although copyright infringement on popular apps may indeed be that high, I find it very hard to give this credibility that every app in the store would have an 75% infringement rate.
"Assuming the proportion of those that are paid falls in the middle of the Bernstein estimate"
Do they even realize how ridiculous this sounds?
I felt it!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3CTaKBjd1ww&feature=related
Wouldn't is still require a female in order for that mutated sperm to produce a generational result which could then reproduce that trait?
At least one of these folks should have been able to tell when they were being affected, yet none of them have been able to do so consistently, ergo they are guessing.
I'm not saying man can't evolve the ability to detect electromagnetic, but obviously that hasn't happened yet.
Why these 'allergic' cases are so willing to simply disregard double blind study results and continue to believe they are 'special' should be something to look at in and of itself.
Considering back in 2006 they did no less than 31 studies (probably more but I'm too lazy to google for them) and found that overwhelmingly, people couldn't even tell when they were around a electromagnetic device like a cell phone:
"31 is a good number of studies, and 24 found that electromagnetic fields have no effect. But 7 did find some measurable effect, and because I have a reputation for pedantry to uphold: in 2 of those studies with positive findings, even the original authors have been unable to replicate the results; for the next 3, the results seem to be statistical artifacts (details below); and for the final 2, the positive results are mutually inconsistent (one shows improved mood with provocation, and the other shows worsened mood)."
There comes a point when both the doctors involved, and society at large need to consider that someone is more likely to simply be a hypochondriac, a head case, or misdiagnosed.
Apparently this storage option is only available in Test Mode according to TFA, and only that mode allows the storage of images.
From TFA:
" A TSA official who spoke on condition of anonymity because the official is not authorized to speak on the record said all full-body scanners have "strong privacy protections in place" and are delivered to airports 'without the capability to store, print or transmit images.' "
"There is no way for someone in the airport environment to put the machine into the test mode," the official said, adding that test mode can be enabled only in TSA test facilities. But the official declined to say whether activating test mode requires additional hardware, software or simply additional knowledge of how the machines operate."
"Further, the TSA says, the machines are not networked and cannot be hacked."
"The TSA officer viewing the image cannot see the actual passenger. No cameras, cell phones or other devices capable of capturing an image are allowed in the room where the image is displayed, according to the TSA. The agency adds that images are deleted from the system after the operator reviews them. And employees who misuse the machines are subject to serious discipline or removal."
I happen to think this is more media trying to feed the frenzy and grab ratings. The whole idea about privacy in an airport is stupid IMO. They can already go through your bag and find any private items that you like to take on your Bahama vacation. This illusion of privacy at an airport is just that. The scanners are necessary and would hopefully eliminate a lot of stupidity that passengers and the TSA must go through in the security checkpoints. Any pink bits that some person has, will look just like the pink bits from the other hundreds or thousands of people that pass through the scanner that day. Unless your John Holmes, I doubt anyone would be impressed or horrified. From what I saw, you end up with this weird metal looking skin, with no easy way to identify the person in the image in any case.
Who cares if they can see your dick, fat rolls, or tits on a metal skinned image that doesn't even resemble a human?
Note, the images from the following link may not be considered as work safe as they depict weird sort of android nudity with full junkage:
http://partnerofapilot.wordpress.com/2008/10/22/tsa-l-3s-xxx-rated-airport-scanner-pictures/
Actually this is more of a problem on sites that don't offer a mobile version. Forum for instance, often use 'page numbers' at the bottom of a long forum list to break up those posts over X number of pages so you end up with something like this at the bottom of a forum post indicating various 'pages' to the discussion:
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ...
Clicking such small links can be a challenge on a smart phone.
Yes and no. It's just a cost trade-off. If the average contact surface for a 'light touch' finger on a capacitive screen is 2 millimeters (just an example as I don't know what the real average contact surface size is), then it wouldn't make much sense to have a resolution of .25 mm as you wouldn't need that fine of a resolution. If the grid points are too far apart so that only two points, or even worse, one point is activated, the drawn line will take a drastic turn to correct where it next sees your finger contact.
What we're seeing in these tests is the actual grid pattern for each of the grid points (a grid point being where these phones are able to 'see' a sensor result). The stairstep pattern is simply what happens when a finger is in between sensor points, or possibly only activating 1, 2 or 3 of the 4 sensor points that make up a 'square'. Think of these points as good old fashioned grid paper, with each sensor point being a corner of a square on that graph paper. If you have a finger press that activates 3 of the 4 corners, then it makes sense that the software should not put your finger 'click' exactly in the center of the 4 points, but rather in the center of the 3 points that are activated. It's basically just using the points where it 'sees' a finger and then finding the center of that click.
Make the grid too low resolution, and you end up with a stair step pattern, just as you see when you try to represent a straight diagonal line at a very low resolution. It appears the software tries to mitigate this by averaging the values so you don't see an perfect stair step pattern, but the stair pattern is definitely there.
It reflects resolution, and shows 'dead spots' in the touch surface that the OS/Software must 'guess' as to approximate location. Granted it's not a very scientific test, but it does show some interesting weaknesses in the varous implementations. For instance, on an iPhone, you can click on a link that is only a few pixels in height and be relatively sure you'll get the correct link out of a list of links.
If you'll think back to the days of low resolution, when you were trying to fit a decent image into a 16x16 icon representation, you get an idea of what this may be showing. If the touch capacitance screen doesn't have a grid address for a specific spot you're trying to touch, it will have to guess between the two nearest points.
This is very similar to mouse resolution.
A more valid test would be to use a 'robotic' finger that could apply exact pressure across all phones, but it does give a decent general idea as to how they stack up.
The idea is that you can convert any display into a WiDi. The monitor isn't wireless. At least not yet anyway. Right now you hook up a box which looks like a wireless router to your TV or display device. It snags the WiDi signal and pipes it out to your display via HDMI.
Does this ratio show up in any texts? Specifically the word breaks, paragraphs, etc?
So you feel the needs of the one, outweigh the needs of the many? The masks are not uncomfortable. I wear one when doing the lawn to control my allergies.
Same principal.
Couldn't the allergic individual just wear a face mask while they were serving?
Imagine what you could accomplish doing the 'funky chicken' in front of your phone...
Is anyone else getting flashbacks from "Species"? I have to wonder what we would look like sans the virus DNA.
Agreed. The whole idea for the vortex engine is dust devils which are not that impressive to begin with.
I don't know about anyone else, but this insane bean counting has driven all semblance of enjoyment out of my job. I'm salaried of course, but I must still report my day in 15 minute increments, use archaic micromanagement tools for every aspect of everything I do as if I'm some sort of consultant who is billing back time. I'm reporting my time in no less than 3 different tools, and in some cases, up to 6.
What happened to IT that they've embraced micromanagement on such an asinine scale?
The steam is just to kick start the process. After that it would rely on convection to power it. The steam kind of stirs the pot.
I would assume the steam is created by conventional power until the vortex is running.
Sorry about that. According to the Atmospheric Vortex Engine link, it also uses convection.
From the first line of the link:
"Mechanical energy is produced when heat is carried upward by convection in the atmosphere."
and a little further down:
"Heating the air within the wall using a temporary heat source such as steam starts the vortex. The heat required to sustain the vortex once established can be the natural heat content of warm humid air or can be provided in cooling towers located outside of the cylindrical wall and upstream of the deflectors."
Ever gotten into a sealed car on a hot summer day? Same idea. The air within the tower will be heated by the greenhouse. The heat will rise, pulling cooler air in from the base using convection.
Apparently they modified this algorythm specifically for lower computational power. From the patent application:
http://www.freshpatents.com/-dt20090611ptan20090147648.php
"Hence, an improved Maximum Likelihood Sequence Estimation, such as for an optical disc reader, would be advantageous and in particular a system allowing for increased flexibility, reduced complexity, reduced computational resource demand, increased applicability and/or improved performance would be advantageous."
Actually he was convicted of 1 of the three counts of impeachment but later acquitted by the Senate. He left office with the highest rating of any president since World War 2.