[...] by combining their sophisticated sensing technology, which receives signals, with the basestations that are already being used to send out signals for mobile communications, [...]
It appears that any country interested in this would need a pretty concentrated supply of base stations (which only have a range of a few miles, AFAIK). It would seem to me that countries wanting to use this technology would be the exact ones that can't, because they don't have enough mobile phone base stations. Iraq, China, and other non-US allies would be greatly benefitted by such a technology, but without the presence of the base stations it can't help them.
And then, the more obvious way to detect stealthy planes is to just blanket the whole sky with your radar, and whatever part _doesn't_ show up must be some kind of overhead flying object.
Having grown up all over the world, I can say without a doubt that the US police forces are some of the best and most professional on the planet. In all the cases you've outlined, the stories made major news headlines because major news networks are located here. If other countries had half the journalists and handycam-toting citizens that we do then you'd see a lot more horrific stories and images done by other police forces around the world. --
Essential Reality has mapped out a plan to take P5 through several stages. A wireless product is on tap. Future plans call for the ability to monitor sweat and pulse and, eventually, a product with tactile feedback.
Since then we've entered into any number of battle zones where we are there out of our own selfish interests, [...]
I can't believe your troll comment got moderated insightful. Any new point of conflict will prove itself a testing ground for new weaponry, technology and fighting tactics. Unlike Nazi Germany in the Spanish civil war, the US does not enter into wars merely to check out its newfangled armaments. And lack of popular support is no reason not to do the right thing, especially when 51% (read: "popular") of the population is eradicating the other 49.
(See: Somalia - Oil, Grenada - Get eyes off of Reagan's illicit activities, bombing Kosovo - Get eyes of Clinton's illicit activities.)
Get real. There's no oil in Somalia. The Grenada invasion took place because the US didn't want another Communist nation 200 miles off its shores. And the Kosovo conflict only came about after two years of fruitless and half-hearted peace attempts by the European neighbors.
Among the other "selfish" conflicts we've fought in include Korea (my, that was egotistical of us), Vietnam (gee, we only lost 50,000 troops for our own, selfish reasons) and Kuwait, because of our original maritime partnership. (Although you could make a strong case there that if they had no oil we might not have been as quick to rescue them--or have created the partnership at all.) The only selfish interests that I see are of those that would rather malign their own country instead of serve it.
That Gaming 3D review is horrible, written by someone who sounds like the half-brother of the guy who made up^H^Hpublished the Matrox specs the other day.
Funny how when things like Intellectual Property stand in the way of individual creativity, big companies talk about the majesty of the law. But when things like, well, Real Property stand in the way of big companies, they become mere technicalities.
Funny how when big companies use legal loopholes against open source advocates and "open" IP in general, Slashdotters get hoppingmad, but when loopholes are used against big companies the Slashdot crowd turns a blind eye and laughs with glee. It's nice how we're much more fair than big companies, isn't it?
--
Gesture-based input only good for closed systems?
on
KDE Gesture Control
·
· Score: 2
When the last/. gesture-based story was posted, I followed a poster's comment and downloaded Sensiva. But while the program works well*, has a beautiful interface and offers a new way of controlling UI, it doesn't perform the killer function: work faster than existing solutions. No matter how fast I can wheel and deal with my mouse and enter all kinds of fancy symbols it's still faster to enter a keyboard combo and not have to move my hands from the home keys.
Now in a closed system, such as a game, drawing program, etc., mouse usage is much more important. But for general use, gesture-based input will only work at the expense of speed.
* I found that it works well for simple symbols. More complicated glyphs, such as figure eights, and symbols with crossover lines, were hopeless, no matter what size or speed I tried them. --
Re:Before you dismiss this out of 'hand' . . .
on
KDE Gesture Control
·
· Score: 1
So, the hard of hearing could control their computer with ASL commands, or dictate letters the same way the rest of us can with a voice-powered word processor, using beefed-up gesture control technology [...]
While this sounds nice in theory--and it would be very cool to see something like this in action--I fail to see how it would be faster, cheaper or more effecient than a plain old computer keyboard. --
If you look a little longer than your nose you will notice that the fnordserver is written by somebody else but is put on the Microsoft site because it works on W2K.
Get your facts straight. The software is on Microsoft's site because they ported it to W2K. It doesn't just happen to work with W2K, as you implied. From their page:
Fnord! is a web server for Windows NT/2000 which we have ported to run on our IPv6 stack.
So unless they plan on purchasing completely obsolete netblocks like say 198.81.129.0-255 then 198.83.0.0.-255 than how do they expect to stay obscured from view?
You're assuming they plan to own the IP addresses they say they're coming from--i.e., non-spoofed IP's. Given that this plan originated from the CIA and (former?) KGB I would say that that's a dangerous assumption. --
Like spread spectrum radio waves, you first have to lock into the variation, wich in this case could be completely random, [...]
Nothing is really "completely random." When creating large sets of random numbers you usually have to rely on some algorithm to create them, which rules out the "random" bit by the definition of an algorithm. --
[...] and they have neither the facts nor the law on their side.
Well, as they say in law school: If the law isn't on your side, pound on the facts. If the facts aren't on your side, pound on the law. If neither the facts nor the law are on your side, pound on the table!
Scaling walls is a good super power. Now lets get on scaling buildings in a single bound.
Sorry, I don't mean to flame here, but this is something I've been thinking about for a while and this seems like a good time to put it into words.
Another site I enjoy reading is Ars. They don't post as many articles per day as/. and don't have as many user comments (that could be a good thing), but their articles are usually well-researched, low-hype and well-thought out comments by the poster. Contrast that with CmdrTaco's foolish statement about "Hey--let's jump over buildings now!"
Yes, this is news for nerds. And it's mostly stuff that matters. But can't it be responsible news for nerds? And how about "stuff that matters--presented in a grown up way." I wish that authors here on/. would have a little more editorial integrity, a little more displayed smarts, and and little less of the hype and misleading articles that we've been seeing lately.
Environmental treaties, such as the Kyoto Agreement, typically make gas and other consumer prices more expensive, not less. You just keep signing those treaties, but don't start wondering why your gas prices keep going up. --
Umm, yeah, that's how capitalism works. You work at the things you're good at, get paid, and use that money to buy the things you can't produce yourself because you lack the skills or capital investment to do so.
The assumption that many people make, which your post failed to include, is that there are certain things that we attempt to place beyond the reaches of pure money and capitalism. Science is one of them. Another, love. And intelligence--I could go on... But the point is that NASA and our space exploration should be more about science, more about exploration, more about goodwill, and less about capitalism and greed and our other selfish human desires. --
The US is the most prosperous nation on earth because we've got an abundance of natural resources, a growing population, and we're not afraid to exploit either one.
Sorry, but you're wrong on all counts. There are plenty of nations that have an abundance of natural resources--Russia, Brazil and Iraq, to name a few--that are not "prosperous." Conversely, there are also nations with few natural resources, like Great Britain, Japan (hence WWII) and Hong Kong (pre-1999) that are relatively prosperous.
There are also nations with growing populations, such as India and Mexico, that aren't prosperous. So it can't be that. And every nation tries to exploit its resources for what it can get. Japanese fisheries. Romanian gold miners. Brazilian loggers. Zambian copper miners. Take your pick. The US doesn't have a monolopy on exploiting their own resources.
The US is the most prosperous nation right now. We certainly weren't always so, and likely we won't always be. It's a matter of historical accident, not the fact that our workers are over-worked.
There's no such thing as a historical accident. History just is. There are no particular "accidental reasons" for how events have unfolded over the course of time. Don't minimize the importance of small factors hundreds and thousands of years ago that influenced where our planet is at today.
...fool you into thinking that the FBI is a God-like policing agency. They have the same problems, short-sightedness and management of any other organization or business in the world. The only reason that paranoid Slashdotters fear the FBI so much is because they themselves are less knowledgeable and organized.
And Timothy, ignoramus-kudos to you for posting this under Censorship. This isn't from the "thinking-of-the-children" department. This is from the "I-want-to-disturb-any-conference-I-want-to-withou t-any-governing-powers-looking-over-my-shoulder-wh ile-I-do-it" department.
(Moderate me down only because I've overstepped the moderation guidelines, not because you personally happen to disagree with my--admittedly unpopular--viewpoint.) --
However, if i walk past a guy there and go "hey look at that car..it's open..wanna steal it?" ad it's my car, that is entrapment.
The key word here, the courts have found, is "predisposition." If I remember the article correctly, in Randy Weaver vs. the FBI the FBI had caught him in a sting operation selling a sawed off shotgun. However, the judge ruled in his favor because he was not predisposed to that type of crime. (This is separate from the whole standoff incident, BTW.)
So even if a police or civilian group "entraps" you in a sting operation, you may still go to jail if you were criminally predisposed, and you may go free if you were not.
(I wish I had some relevant links, but time is short.) --
Just what is it then? Repeat after me. It's infringement. Infringement is not stealing.
Really.
Let's look at the dictionary:
infringe: To transgress or exceed the limits of; violate
steal: To take (the property of another) without right or permission
I hope that you're smart enough to figure out the similarity without more of us having to go through the lecture bit. --
I can't believe that three moderators fell for this pile of dinosaur manure. What a load of self-contradictory, nonsesical and barely-on-topic ravings. I believe that myself, the moderators and Slashdot as a whole are worse off for having read it.
Slashdot Mirror
It appears that any country interested in this would need a pretty concentrated supply of base stations (which only have a range of a few miles, AFAIK). It would seem to me that countries wanting to use this technology would be the exact ones that can't, because they don't have enough mobile phone base stations. Iraq, China, and other non-US allies would be greatly benefitted by such a technology, but without the presence of the base stations it can't help them.
And then, the more obvious way to detect stealthy planes is to just blanket the whole sky with your radar, and whatever part _doesn't_ show up must be some kind of overhead flying object.
Having grown up all over the world, I can say without a doubt that the US police forces are some of the best and most professional on the planet. In all the cases you've outlined, the stories made major news headlines because major news networks are located here. If other countries had half the journalists and handycam-toting citizens that we do then you'd see a lot more horrific stories and images done by other police forces around the world.
--
In case your knee was jerking around when you wrote that comment, read the specs: it's running Windows CE, not Win 9X.
--
From a MacCentral review about the P5 (here):
Essential Reality has mapped out a plan to take P5 through several stages. A wireless product is on tap. Future plans call for the ability to monitor sweat and pulse and, eventually, a product with tactile feedback.
--
I can't believe your troll comment got moderated insightful. Any new point of conflict will prove itself a testing ground for new weaponry, technology and fighting tactics. Unlike Nazi Germany in the Spanish civil war, the US does not enter into wars merely to check out its newfangled armaments. And lack of popular support is no reason not to do the right thing, especially when 51% (read: "popular") of the population is eradicating the other 49.
(See: Somalia - Oil, Grenada - Get eyes off of Reagan's illicit activities, bombing Kosovo - Get eyes of Clinton's illicit activities.)
Get real. There's no oil in Somalia. The Grenada invasion took place because the US didn't want another Communist nation 200 miles off its shores. And the Kosovo conflict only came about after two years of fruitless and half-hearted peace attempts by the European neighbors.
Among the other "selfish" conflicts we've fought in include Korea (my, that was egotistical of us), Vietnam (gee, we only lost 50,000 troops for our own, selfish reasons) and Kuwait, because of our original maritime partnership. (Although you could make a strong case there that if they had no oil we might not have been as quick to rescue them--or have created the partnership at all.) The only selfish interests that I see are of those that would rather malign their own country instead of serve it.
--
There are two much better reviews, one at Futurelooks and the other at The Gadgeteer.
--
Funny how when big companies use legal loopholes against open source advocates and "open" IP in general, Slashdotters get hopping mad, but when loopholes are used against big companies the Slashdot crowd turns a blind eye and laughs with glee. It's nice how we're much more fair than big companies, isn't it?
--
Now in a closed system, such as a game, drawing program, etc., mouse usage is much more important. But for general use, gesture-based input will only work at the expense of speed.
* I found that it works well for simple symbols. More complicated glyphs, such as figure eights, and symbols with crossover lines, were hopeless, no matter what size or speed I tried them.
--
While this sounds nice in theory--and it would be very cool to see something like this in action--I fail to see how it would be faster, cheaper or more effecient than a plain old computer keyboard.
--
Get your facts straight. The software is on Microsoft's site because they ported it to W2K. It doesn't just happen to work with W2K, as you implied. From their page:
Fnord! is a web server for Windows NT/2000 which we have ported to run on our IPv6 stack.
--
Heh, making grammatical mistakes while trying to convince someone how technically literate you are probably isn't the best strategy to find work...
--
You're assuming they plan to own the IP addresses they say they're coming from--i.e., non-spoofed IP's. Given that this plan originated from the CIA and (former?) KGB I would say that that's a dangerous assumption.
--
Nothing is really "completely random." When creating large sets of random numbers you usually have to rely on some algorithm to create them, which rules out the "random" bit by the definition of an algorithm.
--
Well, as they say in law school: If the law isn't on your side, pound on the facts. If the facts aren't on your side, pound on the law. If neither the facts nor the law are on your side, pound on the table!
--
Sorry, I don't mean to flame here, but this is something I've been thinking about for a while and this seems like a good time to put it into words.
Another site I enjoy reading is Ars. They don't post as many articles per day as /. and don't have as many user comments (that could be a good thing), but their articles are usually well-researched, low-hype and well-thought out comments by the poster. Contrast that with CmdrTaco's foolish statement about "Hey--let's jump over buildings now!"
Yes, this is news for nerds. And it's mostly stuff that matters. But can't it be responsible news for nerds? And how about "stuff that matters--presented in a grown up way." I wish that authors here on /. would have a little more editorial integrity, a little more displayed smarts, and and little less of the hype and misleading articles that we've been seeing lately.
Thanks,
Daniel.
--
Environmental treaties, such as the Kyoto Agreement, typically make gas and other consumer prices more expensive, not less. You just keep signing those treaties, but don't start wondering why your gas prices keep going up.
--
The assumption that many people make, which your post failed to include, is that there are certain things that we attempt to place beyond the reaches of pure money and capitalism. Science is one of them. Another, love. And intelligence--I could go on... But the point is that NASA and our space exploration should be more about science, more about exploration, more about goodwill, and less about capitalism and greed and our other selfish human desires.
--
Sorry, but you're wrong on all counts. There are plenty of nations that have an abundance of natural resources--Russia, Brazil and Iraq, to name a few--that are not "prosperous." Conversely, there are also nations with few natural resources, like Great Britain, Japan (hence WWII) and Hong Kong (pre-1999) that are relatively prosperous.
There are also nations with growing populations, such as India and Mexico, that aren't prosperous. So it can't be that. And every nation tries to exploit its resources for what it can get. Japanese fisheries. Romanian gold miners. Brazilian loggers. Zambian copper miners. Take your pick. The US doesn't have a monolopy on exploiting their own resources.
The US is the most prosperous nation right now. We certainly weren't always so, and likely we won't always be. It's a matter of historical accident, not the fact that our workers are over-worked.
There's no such thing as a historical accident. History just is. There are no particular "accidental reasons" for how events have unfolded over the course of time. Don't minimize the importance of small factors hundreds and thousands of years ago that influenced where our planet is at today.
--
Maybe applying in the gaming industry helped.
--
Heh, on Slashdot? It sure does.
--
And Timothy, ignoramus-kudos to you for posting this under Censorship. This isn't from the "thinking-of-the-children" department. This is from the "I-want-to-disturb-any-conference-I-want-to-withou t-any-governing-powers-looking-over-my-shoulder-wh ile-I-do-it" department.
(Moderate me down only because I've overstepped the moderation guidelines, not because you personally happen to disagree with my--admittedly unpopular--viewpoint.)
--
Hmmm...right now after 10 straight hours of work I can think of a few appropriate gestures...
--
The key word here, the courts have found, is "predisposition." If I remember the article correctly, in Randy Weaver vs. the FBI the FBI had caught him in a sting operation selling a sawed off shotgun. However, the judge ruled in his favor because he was not predisposed to that type of crime. (This is separate from the whole standoff incident, BTW.)
So even if a police or civilian group "entraps" you in a sting operation, you may still go to jail if you were criminally predisposed, and you may go free if you were not.
(I wish I had some relevant links, but time is short.)
--
Really.
Let's look at the dictionary:
infringe: To transgress or exceed the limits of; violate
steal: To take (the property of another) without right or permission
I hope that you're smart enough to figure out the similarity without more of us having to go through the lecture bit.
--
I can't believe that three moderators fell for this pile of dinosaur manure. What a load of self-contradictory, nonsesical and barely-on-topic ravings. I believe that myself, the moderators and Slashdot as a whole are worse off for having read it.
--