Assuming they have an intelligent advertising system, we might be able to deduce that there was only one black sedan displaying "WALMART ROLLS BACK PRICES" in the area at that time.
These "I have a patent/copyright" threads tend to become a recursive hierarchy of users having a copyright on the above poster's comment. But, as with any base case... I have a patent on joking about having patents on suing people and am now sueing you for infinity billion yen.
Well, ever since I learned google images has a "find similar images" feature, I have been using it as a sort of cloud-porn-computing system. And google videos is nice too... google is my GOTO porn site these days.
Google now processes hundreds of thousands of Gigabytes of pornography per day.
Each second, Google processes more porn than you have on your flash drive, iPhone, and desktop combined.
Why won't the algorithm work? Well, unless it soaks up too much server time and they simply can't afford the algorithm. I mean, image recognition has come a long ways since the 90s. In fact, there are some completely free computer vision APIs that are pretty powerful.
We only require a basic set of instructions to build complete programs. Specifically, we only need enough of them to achieve Turing Completeness. Modern processors usually have upwards of 30 basic instructions, most of them simply save time. With this sort of encryption, we can't have those same time saving shortcuts. Further, we are forced into using process visualization, with absolutely no way to utilize a JIT Compiler. Because of this, Fully Homomorphic Encryption it incredibly time consuming. It's akin to writing an Interpreter in an already Interpreted programming language.
Sometimes it's not about boosting performance, it's about making the source code easier to maintain. You might not see the benefits directly in the end program, but the people who program it will -- less headaches, less debugging, easier to add updates, etc. To satisfy your curiosity, consider the following: I can copy/paste a piece of programming code that does X, but if I need to change that code, I need to change all of the places I paste'd the code. So instead, I let my programming tools handle 'copy/pasting,' so that I can change the code once and my changes will be reflected everywhere. Stuff like that.
Yes, it is too a general computing platform. The iPad hosts extremely advanced IO capabilities and a Turing Complete processor instruction set designed for generalized program creation. It's "omni-purpose" in every respect, including how users view it and how Apple allows it to be used. It views porn, it views TV, it streams music, handles spread sheets, hosts maps, handles money, views books, and a list of things included on any desktop computer. The ONLY difference is the interface. People are using it as a general purpose system, and Apple knows it. It IS a general purpose computing platform in every single respect except one: Apple wants tight control.
Hence the danger. Either Apple is filled with morons (which we all know isn't true or they wouldn't have such nice products) or they are fully aware they are putting their thumb on general purpose computing systems.
The problem is that the iPhone and iPad are becoming more or less general computing platforms. This isn't a matter of locking down a single, narrow media device, but a broad multi-purpose system. The iPad is a hell-ouv-lot more than a game console -- it has the potential to completely replace a laptop, depending on the user's needs. Apple is getting a foot-hold on our everyday computing needs, so when they lock down such devices they gain an unbelievable amount of control. If tomorrow, we all switched to Apple devices, we would literally have a technology Big Brother. It's not just a buzz phrase at this point, it's how Apple operates. They think they know best, and they are willing to use their power to get their way. Now, that doesn't mean it would be the end of the world or anything, but it would be a sad day for the tech industry. But hey, we can argue all we want online, I vote with my wallet (i.e. I will never buy anything with an Apple logo.) That is, at least, until I don't have much choice.
I know, right? This article pleases me so greatly. In fact, I was hoping they might nuke it already. Maybe it'll make the hole bigger and the entire ocean will fill up with oil? That would be so freak'n awesome. Well, at least until my favorite sea food places go out of business and a large portion of the Earth's population dies. But hey, it involves nuclear bombs, so I'm down.
A bunch of engineers (yes, engineers built the rig) accidentally made something go BOOM. It happens when you push Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics to their far limits -- when stuff goes BOOM, sometimes bad things happen. It's like that Time Machine movie where engineers accidentally made the moon crash into the Earth, because they wanted to build an ocean on it using explosives. Well, they wanted to go thousands of feet below the ocean to suck up millions of gallons of fuel buried below the Earths surface, and it went BOOM. I can't blame them, an engineer somewhere is probably crapping himself because he knows it's his fault.
Yeah, so I'm trolling, wanna fight about it? But in all seriousness, this is why I'm against sudden rapid expansions of industry into sensitive environmental areas.
Re:I don't have the right to make Apple give flash
on
Flash Is Not a Right
·
· Score: 1
I never said Apple owes us Flash. I just said I have the right to do what I want with my personal property. If you don't like it, go screw yourself. And for that matter, Jobs can go screw himself. I will never develop for Apple systems, I will never purchase Apple products, and for that matter I might even avoid hybrid kernels and Objective-C just to be safe.
I don't have the right to make Apple give flash.
on
Flash Is Not a Right
·
· Score: 1
I do have the right to put flash on my personal cell phone.
When I used to get my Happy Meal as a child, I was more entertained by the toy than my food. I began to have weight problems as I grew older because I saw food as an event, a fun thing, a highlight of my day, instead of something to keep me fueled. High calorie foods aren't healthy, but they don't cause fat kids. Children with normal, healthy eating habits will take two bites of their burger and then run along to play with their new toy. When parents use food as a reward ("You did good on your report card, lets order pizza!") you have a problem. When I got to my mid to later teens, most of my friends had normal eating habits -- they didn't get excited by food like me. I picked up on that, and changed my eating habits to view food as fuel, not fun. It took about three years, but I've lost over 50 pounds and have a proper build complete with muscle tone. Bottom line: unhealthy food itself isn't the problem, it's how we view food in our daily lives. If you snack to pass the time, even when you're not hungry, if you go back for seconds after your pains are gone, you have unhealthy eating habits. Eat to live, don't live to eat. It's a habit our culture in America breeds -- food for fun. Unhealthy food isn't the root cause though (even if it contributes.)
Did you even read the/. summary? It clearly said they refused entry even after the dog's papers as a guide dog were shown. In otherwords, they refused entry thinking it was gay, and after proving it was a guide dog, they still refused entry because they thought it was 'also' gay. lurn2read, engrish plox, etc etc.
Oh for christsake, it's not nonsensical, it's true. People are terrified of 'sex,' and anything sex related. It's the latest hip-craze to hate crimes involving sexuality. I can almost hear the hissing masses reading this article "Sssssssseeex offendderrssssss!" Bad judgement, yes; It's just as bad as playing Farmville or WoW. Not worse though.
These poor bastards are going to be burned at the afraid-of-sexuality stake, instead of the do-your-damn-job-instead-of-goofing-off stake. They deserve to be fired like any other idiot who goofs off, but I'm sure they're going to be charged with sex crimes of some sort.
"Broadcasting something they have to hide," namely, don't give your WiFi signal a stupid name. Other than that, why the **** do I care if someone knows my home WiFi signal name? (It's NetNet, if anyone was wondering. Oh noes my privacy!)
Apple has a moral responsibility to provide only high quality apps, and sees that it is necessary to forbid anyone from using their iPhone if they do not abide by their rules; This includes banning porn, and politically sensitive matters. China has a moral responsibility to provide only the highest quality websites, and sees that it is necessary to forbid anyone from using their Internet if they do not abide by their rules; This includes banning porn, and politically sensitive matters.
Slashdot Mirror
Assuming they have an intelligent advertising system, we might be able to deduce that there was only one black sedan displaying "WALMART ROLLS BACK PRICES" in the area at that time.
i can has porn? No, i cant has porn but DROID DOES.
These "I have a patent/copyright" threads tend to become a recursive hierarchy of users having a copyright on the above poster's comment. But, as with any base case... I have a patent on joking about having patents on suing people and am now sueing you for infinity billion yen.
I think that this is another case of Corporate Greed. But personally I blame the Obama Administration.
Well, ever since I learned google images has a "find similar images" feature, I have been using it as a sort of cloud-porn-computing system. And google videos is nice too... google is my GOTO porn site these days.
Google now processes hundreds of thousands of Gigabytes of pornography per day. Each second, Google processes more porn than you have on your flash drive, iPhone, and desktop combined.
Why won't the algorithm work? Well, unless it soaks up too much server time and they simply can't afford the algorithm. I mean, image recognition has come a long ways since the 90s. In fact, there are some completely free computer vision APIs that are pretty powerful.
We don't need to discern the information, that's the whole goddamned point. It means we can solve a+b=c, without ever knowing what a, b, or c are.
The interface is the news, not the implementation. Streaming videos online is to TV as this is to VNC.
We only require a basic set of instructions to build complete programs. Specifically, we only need enough of them to achieve Turing Completeness. Modern processors usually have upwards of 30 basic instructions, most of them simply save time. With this sort of encryption, we can't have those same time saving shortcuts. Further, we are forced into using process visualization, with absolutely no way to utilize a JIT Compiler. Because of this, Fully Homomorphic Encryption it incredibly time consuming. It's akin to writing an Interpreter in an already Interpreted programming language.
Sometimes it's not about boosting performance, it's about making the source code easier to maintain. You might not see the benefits directly in the end program, but the people who program it will -- less headaches, less debugging, easier to add updates, etc. To satisfy your curiosity, consider the following: I can copy/paste a piece of programming code that does X, but if I need to change that code, I need to change all of the places I paste'd the code. So instead, I let my programming tools handle 'copy/pasting,' so that I can change the code once and my changes will be reflected everywhere. Stuff like that.
Yes, it is too a general computing platform. The iPad hosts extremely advanced IO capabilities and a Turing Complete processor instruction set designed for generalized program creation. It's "omni-purpose" in every respect, including how users view it and how Apple allows it to be used. It views porn, it views TV, it streams music, handles spread sheets, hosts maps, handles money, views books, and a list of things included on any desktop computer. The ONLY difference is the interface. People are using it as a general purpose system, and Apple knows it. It IS a general purpose computing platform in every single respect except one: Apple wants tight control.
Hence the danger. Either Apple is filled with morons (which we all know isn't true or they wouldn't have such nice products) or they are fully aware they are putting their thumb on general purpose computing systems.
The problem is that the iPhone and iPad are becoming more or less general computing platforms. This isn't a matter of locking down a single, narrow media device, but a broad multi-purpose system. The iPad is a hell-ouv-lot more than a game console -- it has the potential to completely replace a laptop, depending on the user's needs. Apple is getting a foot-hold on our everyday computing needs, so when they lock down such devices they gain an unbelievable amount of control. If tomorrow, we all switched to Apple devices, we would literally have a technology Big Brother. It's not just a buzz phrase at this point, it's how Apple operates. They think they know best, and they are willing to use their power to get their way. Now, that doesn't mean it would be the end of the world or anything, but it would be a sad day for the tech industry. But hey, we can argue all we want online, I vote with my wallet (i.e. I will never buy anything with an Apple logo.) That is, at least, until I don't have much choice.
I know, right? This article pleases me so greatly. In fact, I was hoping they might nuke it already. Maybe it'll make the hole bigger and the entire ocean will fill up with oil? That would be so freak'n awesome. Well, at least until my favorite sea food places go out of business and a large portion of the Earth's population dies. But hey, it involves nuclear bombs, so I'm down.
A bunch of engineers (yes, engineers built the rig) accidentally made something go BOOM. It happens when you push Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics to their far limits -- when stuff goes BOOM, sometimes bad things happen. It's like that Time Machine movie where engineers accidentally made the moon crash into the Earth, because they wanted to build an ocean on it using explosives. Well, they wanted to go thousands of feet below the ocean to suck up millions of gallons of fuel buried below the Earths surface, and it went BOOM. I can't blame them, an engineer somewhere is probably crapping himself because he knows it's his fault.
Yeah, so I'm trolling, wanna fight about it? But in all seriousness, this is why I'm against sudden rapid expansions of industry into sensitive environmental areas.
I never said Apple owes us Flash. I just said I have the right to do what I want with my personal property. If you don't like it, go screw yourself. And for that matter, Jobs can go screw himself. I will never develop for Apple systems, I will never purchase Apple products, and for that matter I might even avoid hybrid kernels and Objective-C just to be safe.
I do have the right to put flash on my personal cell phone.
When I used to get my Happy Meal as a child, I was more entertained by the toy than my food. I began to have weight problems as I grew older because I saw food as an event, a fun thing, a highlight of my day, instead of something to keep me fueled. High calorie foods aren't healthy, but they don't cause fat kids. Children with normal, healthy eating habits will take two bites of their burger and then run along to play with their new toy. When parents use food as a reward ("You did good on your report card, lets order pizza!") you have a problem. When I got to my mid to later teens, most of my friends had normal eating habits -- they didn't get excited by food like me. I picked up on that, and changed my eating habits to view food as fuel, not fun. It took about three years, but I've lost over 50 pounds and have a proper build complete with muscle tone. Bottom line: unhealthy food itself isn't the problem, it's how we view food in our daily lives. If you snack to pass the time, even when you're not hungry, if you go back for seconds after your pains are gone, you have unhealthy eating habits. Eat to live, don't live to eat. It's a habit our culture in America breeds -- food for fun. Unhealthy food isn't the root cause though (even if it contributes.)
Did you even read the /. summary? It clearly said they refused entry even after the dog's papers as a guide dog were shown. In otherwords, they refused entry thinking it was gay, and after proving it was a guide dog, they still refused entry because they thought it was 'also' gay. lurn2read, engrish plox, etc etc.
It took us nearly a week to export Democracy to Iraq, now we could do it in less than two hours. Sounds like a good deal.
Oh for christsake, it's not nonsensical, it's true. People are terrified of 'sex,' and anything sex related. It's the latest hip-craze to hate crimes involving sexuality. I can almost hear the hissing masses reading this article "Sssssssseeex offendderrssssss!" Bad judgement, yes; It's just as bad as playing Farmville or WoW. Not worse though.
These poor bastards are going to be burned at the afraid-of-sexuality stake, instead of the do-your-damn-job-instead-of-goofing-off stake. They deserve to be fired like any other idiot who goofs off, but I'm sure they're going to be charged with sex crimes of some sort.
"Broadcasting something they have to hide," namely, don't give your WiFi signal a stupid name. Other than that, why the **** do I care if someone knows my home WiFi signal name? (It's NetNet, if anyone was wondering. Oh noes my privacy!)
Apple has a moral responsibility to provide only high quality apps, and sees that it is necessary to forbid anyone from using their iPhone if they do not abide by their rules; This includes banning porn, and politically sensitive matters. China has a moral responsibility to provide only the highest quality websites, and sees that it is necessary to forbid anyone from using their Internet if they do not abide by their rules; This includes banning porn, and politically sensitive matters.