As a viewer of the Daily Show, let me guess what they are thinking...according to Glenn Beck's wise and raptuous sermons, George Soros is a good place to start. Though I really don't think they need to put a name on their straw man.
I have a semi-related theory about military costs. Have you heard about all the problems with the F-22, and how they're starting to have the same kind of trouble with the F-35? Notice a similarity between that and, say, the space shuttle? What they all have in common is a ridiculously inefficient supply chain designed to please the congresscritters at the expense of any semblance of rational business and engineering practice. Now, what would happen if we consolidated the supply chains, improving both the financials and the coalescence of engineering knowledge? You'd end up with the same thing that SpaceX did for rockets: vastly superior technology at vastly lower prices. The jobs would be in only a couple of states, but you'd have hardware that works and a semi-balanced budget. I wonder how long Lockheed and Congress are going to keep this racket going.
Anonymity, maybe not. But pseudonymity darn well is. Just think what the lawyers would do if every email address on every forum post could be subpoenaed unequivocally back to credit account and a person. It would be a hay-day for not only every vain celebrity crying "slander" but also the Sonys and RIAAs of the world looking for "violation-inciting behavior".
Then every email comes with a traceable credit account and anonymity goes out the window...It is a good idea, but it will take some interesting creativity to resolve that problem.
As others have said, celestial navigation has been used for as long as men have looked up at the stars. In fact, every scientific satellite put in space has some sort of "star tracker" telescope to use as an absolute position/pointing reference. There is even a group at NASA working on (open-source, I think) software to both miniaturize the technology for handheld terrestrial use and to generalize it for use on other planets--when astronauts go to the Moon and Mars, they won't have any GPS at all but one of these gizmos to figure out where they are.
If it's something they can control with just a laptop in the field, I would interpret that to mean "largely autonomous" and the operator just says "go to coordinates x,y,z" and then click "land there". At worst , it's entirely auto-stabilized and the pilot just says left,right,up,down,forward,backward. Either way, reaction time isn't going to be a big deal. We gave up on remotely-operated manually-stabilized craft long ago (heck, even manned craft are automatically stabilized a lot of the time now).
As a fellow RC helicopter pilot, I heartily agree when talking about single-rotor birds, but I have tried the coaxials and they are orders of magnitude easier to control. Certainly not trivial, and there are plenty of stunts you can do with them with practice, but they won't fall out of the sky if you take a drink with one hand for a few seconds. The linked model on Amazon is of the medium-sized coaxial variety and comes with a camera pre-attached, so I would expect that anyone with moderate to good coordination could learn to fly it competently in a few hours.
A more pressing issue, before you can actually fly it from an undisclosed location, is what direction the camera is pointing. Unless it's angled on a servo, a down-facing camera is going to be pretty useless for navigation. The most practical setup would have two cameras, and I would fully expect any such operation to have a copilot viewing the telemetry feed while the pilot concentrated on not crashing into things.
What about the dudes that take aerial photographs with RC helicopters for a living? And I'm pretty sure spying on the police for the sake of protestors is "non-commercial" activity.
I'm not sure that's such a good idea...if they realize its true potential, they may move from DNS takedowns to wholesale IP or IP range blocking...then say it's the equivalent of getting your phone confiscated on the way into prison or some asinine analogy like that.
So basically, UMG is dictating to Google what videos it is allowed to host, and in doing so dictates the nature of Google's relationship with the posters. If by "business relationship" you can mean the hosting of a single video, or if UMG's non-DMCA takedown requests can also trigger account sanctions, then I think that is a pretty clear case of interference. The gray area, though is that Google agreed in advance to the terms under which UMG can select who to blacklist, so unless the signing of the agreement can be shown to be involuntary on Google's part I'm not sure if that counts. Basically, it looks like if UMG asks nicely, Google will terminate relations with anyone, but you can't prove they wouldn't have anyways. We cannot know exactly how this stacks up without seeing the text of their agreement.
You must referring to "criminals", not "protesters". Just because they call themselves protesters doesn't mean they deserve the title. The editors clearly intended the award for the people who practiced proper nonviolent protests about real (though myriad) issues, not the dimwits who tagged along as an excuse to fuck people over however the felt like.
Since you seem to have a clear idea of how to handle this situation, let me pose another for your opinion: What if these videos were not the property of the government but of some other private entity? Is it reasonable to expect the owner to bear the cost of defending their own work against rogue claims of ownership? Or is the system broken? Should the government "keep its nose out of it" by repealing the DMCA, repealing recent extensions to copyright law, or abolishing copyright law entirely? The way I see it, the problem at hand is largely the result of the government intervening on behalf of a limited number of private entities, and only the government undo the damage done.
But there are also places where gov getting in the middle has created problems.... Removal of derivative trading boundaries.
Not that I disagree with your point, but I find it funny that you cite deregulation as a problem that government "causes". Most people would call that a *lack* of government.
There are many solutions to overreaching/unfair government, but anarchy is not one of them.
The distinction between money and value only becomes a problem after a debt is incurred. The fact that a dollar is worth $1 is only meaningful if you have $xxx in debt you have to pay off. In daily life, a dollar is worth x minutes of work or x amount of food at the store, and if that changes then you just work more or buy less food. Unfortunately, we have way more debt this time around than in previous cycles, so your explanation is super-relevant.
I think both out-of-control bankers and out-of-control IP squabbles are symptoms of the current attitude in society, or at least among MBAs, that money can be created out of nothing. It's financial alchemy: it appears to work at first, but only because they are siphoning money away from somewhere else in the process, hence the recession. Solve the underlying attitude problem, and we solve all the symptoms at once. How to do that, I have no idea.
It would be hilarious if SpaceX could build anything that could carry *millions of people a year for 20 years* for the price of this train. If they can do that, then we'll all be living on Mars by the time the train is finished and it won't matter.
The part you are missing is the part where Ubisoft's DRM servers go down and you CAN'T access the software you paid for. You did not buy a license to use the software whenever you want, you bought a license to use the software whenever they let you. Hence the analogy to an alarm system that locks out both unauthorized and authorized users.
Unfortunately, most of the stupid people haven't gotten this far by being weak to disease. They're children will survive, but they will likely transmit the disease to others who can't be vaccinated or did not respond to the vaccine. If vaccination only affected the individual getting the vaccine, they would not have enacted this rule.
Slashdot Mirror
Not just home. I installed a radio-transparent roof so I could get a solid lock all the way to the fridge.
As a viewer of the Daily Show, let me guess what they are thinking...according to Glenn Beck's wise and raptuous sermons, George Soros is a good place to start. Though I really don't think they need to put a name on their straw man.
I have a semi-related theory about military costs. Have you heard about all the problems with the F-22, and how they're starting to have the same kind of trouble with the F-35? Notice a similarity between that and, say, the space shuttle? What they all have in common is a ridiculously inefficient supply chain designed to please the congresscritters at the expense of any semblance of rational business and engineering practice. Now, what would happen if we consolidated the supply chains, improving both the financials and the coalescence of engineering knowledge? You'd end up with the same thing that SpaceX did for rockets: vastly superior technology at vastly lower prices. The jobs would be in only a couple of states, but you'd have hardware that works and a semi-balanced budget. I wonder how long Lockheed and Congress are going to keep this racket going.
Anonymity, maybe not. But pseudonymity darn well is. Just think what the lawyers would do if every email address on every forum post could be subpoenaed unequivocally back to credit account and a person. It would be a hay-day for not only every vain celebrity crying "slander" but also the Sonys and RIAAs of the world looking for "violation-inciting behavior".
Then every email comes with a traceable credit account and anonymity goes out the window...It is a good idea, but it will take some interesting creativity to resolve that problem.
As others have said, celestial navigation has been used for as long as men have looked up at the stars. In fact, every scientific satellite put in space has some sort of "star tracker" telescope to use as an absolute position/pointing reference. There is even a group at NASA working on (open-source, I think) software to both miniaturize the technology for handheld terrestrial use and to generalize it for use on other planets--when astronauts go to the Moon and Mars, they won't have any GPS at all but one of these gizmos to figure out where they are.
If it's something they can control with just a laptop in the field, I would interpret that to mean "largely autonomous" and the operator just says "go to coordinates x,y,z" and then click "land there". At worst , it's entirely auto-stabilized and the pilot just says left,right,up,down,forward,backward. Either way, reaction time isn't going to be a big deal. We gave up on remotely-operated manually-stabilized craft long ago (heck, even manned craft are automatically stabilized a lot of the time now).
A more pressing issue, before you can actually fly it from an undisclosed location, is what direction the camera is pointing. Unless it's angled on a servo, a down-facing camera is going to be pretty useless for navigation. The most practical setup would have two cameras, and I would fully expect any such operation to have a copilot viewing the telemetry feed while the pilot concentrated on not crashing into things.
What about the dudes that take aerial photographs with RC helicopters for a living? And I'm pretty sure spying on the police for the sake of protestors is "non-commercial" activity.
I'm not sure that's such a good idea...if they realize its true potential, they may move from DNS takedowns to wholesale IP or IP range blocking...then say it's the equivalent of getting your phone confiscated on the way into prison or some asinine analogy like that.
So basically, UMG is dictating to Google what videos it is allowed to host, and in doing so dictates the nature of Google's relationship with the posters. If by "business relationship" you can mean the hosting of a single video, or if UMG's non-DMCA takedown requests can also trigger account sanctions, then I think that is a pretty clear case of interference. The gray area, though is that Google agreed in advance to the terms under which UMG can select who to blacklist, so unless the signing of the agreement can be shown to be involuntary on Google's part I'm not sure if that counts. Basically, it looks like if UMG asks nicely, Google will terminate relations with anyone, but you can't prove they wouldn't have anyways. We cannot know exactly how this stacks up without seeing the text of their agreement.
Obvious troll is obvious.
You must referring to "criminals", not "protesters". Just because they call themselves protesters doesn't mean they deserve the title. The editors clearly intended the award for the people who practiced proper nonviolent protests about real (though myriad) issues, not the dimwits who tagged along as an excuse to fuck people over however the felt like.
Might be more useful if they awarded an "Award of the Year of the Year" award. That way we could award the best award!
Since you seem to have a clear idea of how to handle this situation, let me pose another for your opinion: What if these videos were not the property of the government but of some other private entity? Is it reasonable to expect the owner to bear the cost of defending their own work against rogue claims of ownership? Or is the system broken? Should the government "keep its nose out of it" by repealing the DMCA, repealing recent extensions to copyright law, or abolishing copyright law entirely? The way I see it, the problem at hand is largely the result of the government intervening on behalf of a limited number of private entities, and only the government undo the damage done.
But there are also places where gov getting in the middle has created problems. ... Removal of derivative trading boundaries.
Not that I disagree with your point, but I find it funny that you cite deregulation as a problem that government "causes". Most people would call that a *lack* of government.
There are many solutions to overreaching/unfair government, but anarchy is not one of them.
It's only boring if you can't read octal...
The distinction between money and value only becomes a problem after a debt is incurred. The fact that a dollar is worth $1 is only meaningful if you have $xxx in debt you have to pay off. In daily life, a dollar is worth x minutes of work or x amount of food at the store, and if that changes then you just work more or buy less food. Unfortunately, we have way more debt this time around than in previous cycles, so your explanation is super-relevant.
I think both out-of-control bankers and out-of-control IP squabbles are symptoms of the current attitude in society, or at least among MBAs, that money can be created out of nothing. It's financial alchemy: it appears to work at first, but only because they are siphoning money away from somewhere else in the process, hence the recession. Solve the underlying attitude problem, and we solve all the symptoms at once. How to do that, I have no idea.
Check out AMSAT...these guys have been building amateur communication satellites for years. http://www.amsat.org/amsat-new/index.php
Since when were transportation systems supposed to break even? Did you include all the money saved by:
Only then can you measure its true value to taxpayers.
It would be hilarious if SpaceX could build anything that could carry *millions of people a year for 20 years* for the price of this train. If they can do that, then we'll all be living on Mars by the time the train is finished and it won't matter.
The part you are missing is the part where Ubisoft's DRM servers go down and you CAN'T access the software you paid for. You did not buy a license to use the software whenever you want, you bought a license to use the software whenever they let you. Hence the analogy to an alarm system that locks out both unauthorized and authorized users.
Unfortunately, most of the stupid people haven't gotten this far by being weak to disease. They're children will survive, but they will likely transmit the disease to others who can't be vaccinated or did not respond to the vaccine. If vaccination only affected the individual getting the vaccine, they would not have enacted this rule.
Sorry, I was off by an order of magnitude on that last number. It should be 30,000 traffic deaths per year (source).