I predict a flood of funny photos on the Interwebz using Content-Aware Fill and Puppet Warp – probably with silly captions. More practical applications: removing an ex from all your photos, adding a secret crush to all your photos, and of course implausible uses in movies like removing the hero from live feeds so he can sneak past security cameras.
If you're in the right, but not having as much power as a big corporation means you'll lose anyway, then your U.S. legislative system is broken. Please fix it.
This is the kind of thing that bothers me most, not about welfare, but about the way we implement. I say this as a Libertarian/Democrat. I had a long-distance (girl)friend at one time who had to go on welfare. She had been working, but got pregnant, the father left, she wanted to have the baby. She was a minimum-wage worker. Welfare would support her more profitibly than working at minimum wage. She wanted to work. She couldn't afford to work. Oh sure, she could work and support the baby and just feed the baby less or herself less or live in rags (which by the way she was already basically doing, so I mean raggier rags). Or she could have been "responsible" and aborted the baby or given up the baby instead of succumbing to her motherly instincts and taken care of a baby she couldn't afford to raise.
Until then, I had believed people on welfare could get out of it if they wanted to. Having lived through the details of how the welfare system works taught me that is not always the case. This tells me the system is messed up.
That it is the same for health care doesn't surprise me one bit. The US just does socialism wrong. Until we fix how we do socialism, it's just not going to work for us and it will become a self-fulfilling prophecy that "socialism doesn't work". It's because we're not really doing socialism.
Ok, after previewing all that, I realize it's mostly an emotional rant and a bit off topic. This is what happens when a perfectly good idea "let's (government) provide health coverage for everyone" turns into "let's (big business) make money by keeping people poor".
A US-based company, full of US citizens, acting to further the interests of the US. No shit Sherlock!
Don't worry China. As soon as you become enough of a consumer nation that Google's advertising-based model is overwhelmingly profitable for them in China, they'll have to bow to their stockholders, who won't be able to stop from salivating over your billions of consumers.
Until then, your whining makes us all feel good about ourselves, as we all secretly fear we're getting the same propoganda from our own government (regardless of political party).
You just can't present more information to the audience than you started with.
Actually, even that isn't true anymore – or at least, soon won't be true anymore. It's true you can't create detail that never existed in the first (and probably wouldn't want to), but you can reconstruct detail from real life that isn't captured by the recording medium. Look at the kind of techniques here. This is not creating detail that didn't exist, but finding the detail that did exist from unexpected sources.
I would not be surprised if this demand for 3D would spark someone to discover a way to take the motion information from a movie and convert that into spatial information – assuming that hasn't already been done.
Let's say all that is true (because I have no reason to believe you are wrong). If Nokia refused to make a reasonable deal with Apple – one that would violate anti-trust laws – shouldn't Apple have sued Nokia at that point, rather than build a device they knew required licensing to use that they didn't have? Is this "it's easier to ask forgiveness than it is to get permission"?
If Apple had built something and just failed to identify patents because they didn't research some obscure patents, I could understand. But it's obvious from the background that Apple did know and simply chose to violate the patents with the presumption they would fight that battle later – and win. I can almost see accounts/lawyers weighing that if they put the iPhone on the market and it tanks, then Nokia won't bother to sue. If the iPhone succeeds, then it will pay for its own court costs.
Considering air, food, water and shelter are all you really need, of course the Internet isn't in this list. But it's certainly far beyond novelty. It's certainly nearly an expectation. It's certainly such a core part of people's way of life that many would barely function, or function far less effectively without it. The same would be true of the television, radio, automobiles, phones, electricity, or anything else invented by man over the last 10,000 years. I think that's what we're talking about here when we say a necessity.
Seriously though, I'm an Edward Tufte fun myself, but his statement, "And it is the complete opposite of everything else I do," is kind of funny. I know he didn't mean it literally. "Yeah my car's not working, so I hired a painter to fix it."
Sounds like they've learned their lesson from the RIAA. I'm not saying I agree with them and think they are right to do this. But, if you're going to try to enforce your interpretation of the law, this is at least a sane philosophy of doing so. Not going after damages is a smart move.
I concede, I was absolutely wrong and did not think that out. I do not know why I claimed blu-ray would be cheaper than HDD when I did not know that for a fact. Proof that one should not go by intuition when claiming something as a fact.
I'd like to see Clippy pop up on my windshield and say, "It looks like you're trying to accelerate in a situation where no sane person would accelerate. Are you sure you don't want to not stop decelerating? Yes. No. Cancel."
Gameplay (timing of combatant movement and weapons fire)
On screen clock (ok that one is lame, but a list of two items would have looked silly)
The real point is, there are other reasons that would come to mind if one didn't have DRM-blinders on. DRM-hating becomes a conspiracy mentality, influencing one to fit everything into some evil DRM scheme. Not that there aren't real evil DRM schemes!
Right, we can have a post that the new Apple tablet device might be called the iSlate because it "just makes sense" , but a story that appears to be true isn't interesting just because it doesn't give implementation details.
With faster algorithms, the machine can just get more jobs done in the same amount of time. But the jobs will just keep coming, so the energy use never changes.
This is true, but the energy-cost-per-job is still 1/100th the cost and if you're paying to run the job, that could be a significant savings.
Slashdot Mirror
I think you missed the part, "and asked him for a copy when he showed it to her." Nervous request for a copy?
They should just train it on Slashdot comments.
Do we ever tell the Pope to STFU because he disagrees with some other Christian Church 1/10th their size?
Maybe we should.
I predict a flood of funny photos on the Interwebz using Content-Aware Fill and Puppet Warp – probably with silly captions. More practical applications: removing an ex from all your photos, adding a secret crush to all your photos, and of course implausible uses in movies like removing the hero from live feeds so he can sneak past security cameras.
There is no Office 13 - But Why? – a video produced by Microsft on MSDN Channel 9 – explains why there is no Office 13.
If you're in the right, but not having as much power as a big corporation means you'll lose anyway, then your U.S. legislative system is broken. Please fix it.
This is the kind of thing that bothers me most, not about welfare, but about the way we implement. I say this as a Libertarian/Democrat. I had a long-distance (girl)friend at one time who had to go on welfare. She had been working, but got pregnant, the father left, she wanted to have the baby. She was a minimum-wage worker. Welfare would support her more profitibly than working at minimum wage. She wanted to work. She couldn't afford to work. Oh sure, she could work and support the baby and just feed the baby less or herself less or live in rags (which by the way she was already basically doing, so I mean raggier rags). Or she could have been "responsible" and aborted the baby or given up the baby instead of succumbing to her motherly instincts and taken care of a baby she couldn't afford to raise.
Until then, I had believed people on welfare could get out of it if they wanted to. Having lived through the details of how the welfare system works taught me that is not always the case. This tells me the system is messed up.
That it is the same for health care doesn't surprise me one bit. The US just does socialism wrong. Until we fix how we do socialism, it's just not going to work for us and it will become a self-fulfilling prophecy that "socialism doesn't work". It's because we're not really doing socialism.
Ok, after previewing all that, I realize it's mostly an emotional rant and a bit off topic. This is what happens when a perfectly good idea "let's (government) provide health coverage for everyone" turns into "let's (big business) make money by keeping people poor".
A US-based company, full of US citizens, acting to further the interests of the US. No shit Sherlock!
Don't worry China. As soon as you become enough of a consumer nation that Google's advertising-based model is overwhelmingly profitable for them in China, they'll have to bow to their stockholders, who won't be able to stop from salivating over your billions of consumers.
Until then, your whining makes us all feel good about ourselves, as we all secretly fear we're getting the same propoganda from our own government (regardless of political party).
You just can't present more information to the audience than you started with.
Actually, even that isn't true anymore – or at least, soon won't be true anymore. It's true you can't create detail that never existed in the first (and probably wouldn't want to), but you can reconstruct detail from real life that isn't captured by the recording medium. Look at the kind of techniques here. This is not creating detail that didn't exist, but finding the detail that did exist from unexpected sources.
I would not be surprised if this demand for 3D would spark someone to discover a way to take the motion information from a movie and convert that into spatial information – assuming that hasn't already been done.
Let's say all that is true (because I have no reason to believe you are wrong). If Nokia refused to make a reasonable deal with Apple – one that would violate anti-trust laws – shouldn't Apple have sued Nokia at that point, rather than build a device they knew required licensing to use that they didn't have? Is this "it's easier to ask forgiveness than it is to get permission"?
If Apple had built something and just failed to identify patents because they didn't research some obscure patents, I could understand. But it's obvious from the background that Apple did know and simply chose to violate the patents with the presumption they would fight that battle later – and win. I can almost see accounts/lawyers weighing that if they put the iPhone on the market and it tanks, then Nokia won't bother to sue. If the iPhone succeeds, then it will pay for its own court costs.
You are so right that Activision is planning to do exactly this with Call of Duty.
Considering air, food, water and shelter are all you really need, of course the Internet isn't in this list. But it's certainly far beyond novelty. It's certainly nearly an expectation. It's certainly such a core part of people's way of life that many would barely function, or function far less effectively without it. The same would be true of the television, radio, automobiles, phones, electricity, or anything else invented by man over the last 10,000 years. I think that's what we're talking about here when we say a necessity.
How does this guy think he's gonna make money on something that is patent and cost free? That's just insane! Ideas don't grow on trees, you know?!
Seriously though, I'm an Edward Tufte fun myself, but his statement, "And it is the complete opposite of everything else I do," is kind of funny. I know he didn't mean it literally. "Yeah my car's not working, so I hired a painter to fix it."
According the legal brief that IW filed they didn't "SELL" to Activision, Activision simply bought them out.
This is a sincere question. How can you buy something that isn't for sale? Unless you're the government.
I still can't understand why IW choose to let them be bought out though
Apparently you don't understand the appeal of even more money.
Sounds like they've learned their lesson from the RIAA. I'm not saying I agree with them and think they are right to do this. But, if you're going to try to enforce your interpretation of the law, this is at least a sane philosophy of doing so. Not going after damages is a smart move.
I concede, I was absolutely wrong and did not think that out. I do not know why I claimed blu-ray would be cheaper than HDD when I did not know that for a fact. Proof that one should not go by intuition when claiming something as a fact.
Have you already ruled out blu-ray? 25GB per disc, make two copies per customer. Much cheaper than RAID5.
I'd like to see Clippy pop up on my windshield and say, "It looks like you're trying to accelerate in a situation where no sane person would accelerate. Are you sure you don't want to not stop decelerating? Yes. No. Cancel."
-1 Troll +1 Informative = +1 Funny?! What kind of algorithm are they using on Slashdot??
So that Ice Planet movie isn't looking so silly after all, is it?
Other reasons to require date being in sync:
The real point is, there are other reasons that would come to mind if one didn't have DRM-blinders on. DRM-hating becomes a conspiracy mentality, influencing one to fit everything into some evil DRM scheme. Not that there aren't real evil DRM schemes!
Right, we can have a post that the new Apple tablet device might be called the iSlate because it "just makes sense" , but a story that appears to be true isn't interesting just because it doesn't give implementation details.
With faster algorithms, the machine can just get more jobs done in the same amount of time. But the jobs will just keep coming, so the energy use never changes.
This is true, but the energy-cost-per-job is still 1/100th the cost and if you're paying to run the job, that could be a significant savings.