At least only very rich idiots will be able to afford a fully automatic weapon just to make noise on new year's eve (and likewise with a $1000 laser pointer). Anyone else has got to have a pretty good reason for getting one, nefarious or otherwise.
Very good analogy. Both the laser and the kitchen knife were manufactured for specific purposes in specific facilities, but the only thing they could be when carried on the street is a weapon.
Thanks to this post, my server, at least, is fully patched now. How many years will it be before all the production systems in the world have this installed?
"Seat belts sometimes cause chafing, which under the right combination of sunlight and bacteria might cause skin cancer, so you should stop wearing it. Can you PROVE that seat belts don't cause skin cancer? But Doctor Scamographer said they might! Why don't you come back when there is a consensus!"
The only time I hear about HP servers is when our corporate bookkeeping system is "experiencing technical difficulties" and "we are working with the HP technicians to resolve the issue".
I think there are studies that show the *mental* effort of holding a conversation is enough to impair a majority of drivers, regardless of where their hands are. So it's not just "a couple of morons", its a far greater percentage of the population. And these come in all shades of varying degree of impairment and judgement on when to use it, so if you allow it all, the law very quickly becomes a question of how much impairment is okay? Is it okay if I only use it at stoplights? Or put it down while merging? Will my fine be lower if I score highly on a multitasking evaluation of some sort? Is it only a problem if I cause an accident? Or if a cop looks at me funny? I think most people would argue at that point that no level of impairment is okay, which is where we are today. The hypocrisy is clear, given the amount of fatigue and drunkenness we seem to accept as normal, but that is the argument.
Of course, you're right--the factions lobbying for electromagnetic shielding in windows and velocity-based lockouts are totally misguided, since those restrict the passengers as well as the driver. But the fact is the problem is somewhat bigger than you make it sound.
Fun fact: Humans are social animals, and nothing can change this. "Socialism" is an evolutionary result and survival trait. Anybody opposing it wholesale is engaging in some pretty serious self-denial. The whole reason we form governments (as every society in the history of the human race has) is to make better decisions through group cooperation.
I heard an interesting bit the other day about one psychologist's take on "reason" and the human mind. He said that we are biologically programmed not to make rational individual choices, but to make the best arguments. Only by involving multiple people in the argument can we actually make rational decisions. Presumably, the more people involved, the better the decision, which is why democracy is the best form of government. Unfortunately, some people have lost sight of that and think the point of arguing is to win regardless, and not necessarily get the best result for society.
So a train derailed, and people were evacuated as a precaution, but the hazmat cars were empty and it was no big deal. If you consider that tantamount to a catastrophic, easily preventable collision killing 35 people and wounding 191, then I think your standards are pretty high. Derailments happen, but in the U.S. we have safety equipment and procedures rigorously enforced to prevent casualties. Only on the notoriously underfunded Washington, D.C., metro system can I recall an accident caused by equipment failure and not operator error--and this only happened because commuter rail systems are not regulated by the federal government like intercity rail.
Of course, this patent troll isn't as big as the RIAA is, so the chance that they would be found to be extorting money out of alleged infringers is much higher.
FTFY. It helps to be a big organization paying off politicians when trying to deflect legal flak like Rule 11 violations.
The only thing that will change is the patent trolls will look a little more closely to make sure their targets can't defend a lawsuit. I wonder: could the previously settled parties use this judgement as the basis of separate legal action against the troll, seeking damages for extortion? Not that it would be that much cheaper than defending the patent suit in the first place.
As a longtime Thinkpad fan, every time Lenovo comes out with a new model I wonder if it will disappoint. So far, so good--my last two needed no more than one repair during two years of abuse. That's damn good, considering it seems every Dell I so much as look at sideways shits its pants in short order. If you want a solid business machine that's modest in appearance but reliable on the inside, Thinkpads are the way to go.
I just got a T420s and I really like it. It only gets 3-6 hours on a charge (with an Intel SSD), but that's not surprising--it's a full-power laptop with half the battery, which is why it weighs a full pound less than the T420. It suits me just fine--when I'm using it heavily, the larger battery wouldn't actually help much. I have lots of power adapters (slim AC/DC, plus one at home and work), so I rarely need the battery for more than an hour. I don't do a lot of traveling, and take the train when I do, so the whole airport/airplane outlet scarcity deal is not an issue.
The rest of the time I'm carrying it like a netbook just on the off-chance that I'll need something, but I always have the CPU/GPU to pull up a big drawing for a customer or something. That extra pound makes a big difference--my previous laptop was a behemoth T400 that still only got 3.5 hours and weighed 6 pounds, had the old clunky GPU switching, and a slower processor.
But it is true that you should not get the T420s and expect it to be exactly equivalent to the full-size model. That extra few hours of battery life could make a difference for some folks (though the ultrabay battery might improve it). It also costs more (got mine on a special T420s promo) and has limitations like requiring a 7mm HDD instead of the standard 9.5mm, and only 3 USB ports (but includes USB 3.0, unlike the current T420).
P.S. Though probably not a unique feature, I was surprised to discover that my T420s can drive two external displays independently, without the docking station--a three-monitor desktop on a laptop is pretty sweet! I'm guessing it fires up both the discrete and integrated graphics at the same time. Even my Dell with a Quadro can only do two at a time.
As one of the lucky few who have so far been unaffected (cushy government job, *crosses fingers*), I make it a point to do my part and keep the economy rolling. Or at least that part of the economy consisting of Newegg, Amazon, and the local deli.
So then they will start filtering for anything and everything, like kiddie porn. But if it makes them cut off botnet-infested users, then there could be a pellet of silver inside the cloud of shit.
With video quality, the relevant technologies for modern techniques are patented. This means...
...competing companies have incentive to innovate and build on their existing work to compete with the patented technologies, so the state of the art is fast to advance.
The key part of your sentence is "build on their existing work". They can't build on the existing work of the patented standard. They can only duplicate effort. And if, by chance, the patent in question covers a mathematical algorithm that is provably the most efficient, then it is inevitable that they will come to the same result (the patent), either intentionally or accidentally, and be unable to continue. Meanwhile, the owner of the patent knows this, and takes his jolly good time improving the patent. How exactly does this translate to faster innovation?
I'm curious: what evidence do you have to refute the OP's claim by showing that the state of the art is progressing faster than it would if there were no video codec patents? His claim was that the patented algorithms essentially cover all possible means for improvement, denying many people the chance to contribute.
And according to my TED power meter, 12kWh is close to the MINIMUM my house has ever used in one day. Usually it's 30-40kWh in fair weather and 60-80kWh in summer with AC running. It's an old house with poor insulation, five active people using indoor lights all day, two fridges, and lots of cooking on the electric range and laundry in the electric dryer. We also do crazy things like paint the house in the summer which requires the AC be running with the windows open. Granted, if the power went out and we were running only the fridge and lighting it would go down considerably. But it will be much more practical to install ~3kW solar panel array than to rely on an electric car battery.
On the other hand, your household seems like a perfect candidate for this technology. Could be a lifesaver, especially if it means you could keep your business running during an outage.
A lot of those problems are going to be worked out with the help of gentlemen like the GP, in their big corporate IT labs. It's surprisingly common for expensive, complex equipment like this to be debugged partially on the customer's dime, and I hope the rest of us can benefit from the result.
"But the flood was caused by Global Climate Change, and flood insurance doesn't cover that. No sir, we don't sell Climate Change Insurance yet. Our actuaries are still calculating the odds of total world destruction."
Nope. This is exactly how cyber insurance should be: an incentive to keep your networks secure. If you can prove you have them up to industry standards (set by the insurance companies), then you are insured against extraordinary events. There's no point in insuring something that is guaranteed to happen eventually, like the breach of an unsecured network. This is exactly how health insurance works in the U.S., at least the better ones. It's in the insurance company's best interest to keep you healthy, so they incentivize things like regular doctor's visits and not smoking and stuff. It's the only way to get people's heads out of the sand and monetize the risk in the here and now to affect decisions before it's too late.
Slashdot Mirror
At least only very rich idiots will be able to afford a fully automatic weapon just to make noise on new year's eve (and likewise with a $1000 laser pointer). Anyone else has got to have a pretty good reason for getting one, nefarious or otherwise.
Very good analogy. Both the laser and the kitchen knife were manufactured for specific purposes in specific facilities, but the only thing they could be when carried on the street is a weapon.
Thanks to this post, my server, at least, is fully patched now. How many years will it be before all the production systems in the world have this installed?
Those are great links! Have you posted them as submissions yet? Somebody's got to provide the content, and you seem to know where to look.
"Seat belts sometimes cause chafing, which under the right combination of sunlight and bacteria might cause skin cancer, so you should stop wearing it. Can you PROVE that seat belts don't cause skin cancer? But Doctor Scamographer said they might! Why don't you come back when there is a consensus!"
*CRASH* *SPLAT*
Never mind, then...
Easy. Just go 88 mph and hit the next light on the PREVIOUS CYCLE!
The only time I hear about HP servers is when our corporate bookkeeping system is "experiencing technical difficulties" and "we are working with the HP technicians to resolve the issue".
I think there are studies that show the *mental* effort of holding a conversation is enough to impair a majority of drivers, regardless of where their hands are. So it's not just "a couple of morons", its a far greater percentage of the population. And these come in all shades of varying degree of impairment and judgement on when to use it, so if you allow it all, the law very quickly becomes a question of how much impairment is okay? Is it okay if I only use it at stoplights? Or put it down while merging? Will my fine be lower if I score highly on a multitasking evaluation of some sort? Is it only a problem if I cause an accident? Or if a cop looks at me funny? I think most people would argue at that point that no level of impairment is okay, which is where we are today. The hypocrisy is clear, given the amount of fatigue and drunkenness we seem to accept as normal, but that is the argument.
Of course, you're right--the factions lobbying for electromagnetic shielding in windows and velocity-based lockouts are totally misguided, since those restrict the passengers as well as the driver. But the fact is the problem is somewhat bigger than you make it sound.
Fun fact: Humans are social animals, and nothing can change this. "Socialism" is an evolutionary result and survival trait. Anybody opposing it wholesale is engaging in some pretty serious self-denial. The whole reason we form governments (as every society in the history of the human race has) is to make better decisions through group cooperation.
I heard an interesting bit the other day about one psychologist's take on "reason" and the human mind. He said that we are biologically programmed not to make rational individual choices, but to make the best arguments. Only by involving multiple people in the argument can we actually make rational decisions. Presumably, the more people involved, the better the decision, which is why democracy is the best form of government. Unfortunately, some people have lost sight of that and think the point of arguing is to win regardless, and not necessarily get the best result for society.
So a train derailed, and people were evacuated as a precaution, but the hazmat cars were empty and it was no big deal. If you consider that tantamount to a catastrophic, easily preventable collision killing 35 people and wounding 191, then I think your standards are pretty high. Derailments happen, but in the U.S. we have safety equipment and procedures rigorously enforced to prevent casualties. Only on the notoriously underfunded Washington, D.C., metro system can I recall an accident caused by equipment failure and not operator error--and this only happened because commuter rail systems are not regulated by the federal government like intercity rail.
Of course, this patent troll isn't as big as the RIAA is, so the chance that they would be found to be extorting money out of alleged infringers is much higher.
FTFY. It helps to be a big organization paying off politicians when trying to deflect legal flak like Rule 11 violations.
The only thing that will change is the patent trolls will look a little more closely to make sure their targets can't defend a lawsuit. I wonder: could the previously settled parties use this judgement as the basis of separate legal action against the troll, seeking damages for extortion? Not that it would be that much cheaper than defending the patent suit in the first place.
As a longtime Thinkpad fan, every time Lenovo comes out with a new model I wonder if it will disappoint. So far, so good--my last two needed no more than one repair during two years of abuse. That's damn good, considering it seems every Dell I so much as look at sideways shits its pants in short order. If you want a solid business machine that's modest in appearance but reliable on the inside, Thinkpads are the way to go.
I just got a T420s and I really like it. It only gets 3-6 hours on a charge (with an Intel SSD), but that's not surprising--it's a full-power laptop with half the battery, which is why it weighs a full pound less than the T420. It suits me just fine--when I'm using it heavily, the larger battery wouldn't actually help much. I have lots of power adapters (slim AC/DC, plus one at home and work), so I rarely need the battery for more than an hour. I don't do a lot of traveling, and take the train when I do, so the whole airport/airplane outlet scarcity deal is not an issue.
The rest of the time I'm carrying it like a netbook just on the off-chance that I'll need something, but I always have the CPU/GPU to pull up a big drawing for a customer or something. That extra pound makes a big difference--my previous laptop was a behemoth T400 that still only got 3.5 hours and weighed 6 pounds, had the old clunky GPU switching, and a slower processor.
But it is true that you should not get the T420s and expect it to be exactly equivalent to the full-size model. That extra few hours of battery life could make a difference for some folks (though the ultrabay battery might improve it). It also costs more (got mine on a special T420s promo) and has limitations like requiring a 7mm HDD instead of the standard 9.5mm, and only 3 USB ports (but includes USB 3.0, unlike the current T420).
P.S. Though probably not a unique feature, I was surprised to discover that my T420s can drive two external displays independently, without the docking station--a three-monitor desktop on a laptop is pretty sweet! I'm guessing it fires up both the discrete and integrated graphics at the same time. Even my Dell with a Quadro can only do two at a time.
As one of the lucky few who have so far been unaffected (cushy government job, *crosses fingers*), I make it a point to do my part and keep the economy rolling. Or at least that part of the economy consisting of Newegg, Amazon, and the local deli.
So then they will start filtering for anything and everything, like kiddie porn. But if it makes them cut off botnet-infested users, then there could be a pellet of silver inside the cloud of shit.
Easier than you might think. Assuming both devices have connectors... http://www.balticnetworks.com/ubiquiti-airmax-rp-sma-to-rp-sma-jumper.html
With video quality, the relevant technologies for modern techniques are patented. This means...
...competing companies have incentive to innovate and build on their existing work to compete with the patented technologies, so the state of the art is fast to advance.
The key part of your sentence is "build on their existing work". They can't build on the existing work of the patented standard. They can only duplicate effort. And if, by chance, the patent in question covers a mathematical algorithm that is provably the most efficient, then it is inevitable that they will come to the same result (the patent), either intentionally or accidentally, and be unable to continue. Meanwhile, the owner of the patent knows this, and takes his jolly good time improving the patent. How exactly does this translate to faster innovation?
I'm curious: what evidence do you have to refute the OP's claim by showing that the state of the art is progressing faster than it would if there were no video codec patents? His claim was that the patented algorithms essentially cover all possible means for improvement, denying many people the chance to contribute.
I agree. Would you like to add isolated genetic material to your list of never-should-have-been-patentable patents?
But you didn't deny the correlation. Absurd patent systems could simply be a symptom rather than a cause of failing empires.
And according to my TED power meter, 12kWh is close to the MINIMUM my house has ever used in one day. Usually it's 30-40kWh in fair weather and 60-80kWh in summer with AC running. It's an old house with poor insulation, five active people using indoor lights all day, two fridges, and lots of cooking on the electric range and laundry in the electric dryer. We also do crazy things like paint the house in the summer which requires the AC be running with the windows open. Granted, if the power went out and we were running only the fridge and lighting it would go down considerably. But it will be much more practical to install ~3kW solar panel array than to rely on an electric car battery.
On the other hand, your household seems like a perfect candidate for this technology. Could be a lifesaver, especially if it means you could keep your business running during an outage.
Not to be confused with "girls do geeks again", which has its own set of likelihoods.
A lot of those problems are going to be worked out with the help of gentlemen like the GP, in their big corporate IT labs. It's surprisingly common for expensive, complex equipment like this to be debugged partially on the customer's dime, and I hope the rest of us can benefit from the result.
"But the flood was caused by Global Climate Change, and flood insurance doesn't cover that. No sir, we don't sell Climate Change Insurance yet. Our actuaries are still calculating the odds of total world destruction."
Nope. This is exactly how cyber insurance should be: an incentive to keep your networks secure. If you can prove you have them up to industry standards (set by the insurance companies), then you are insured against extraordinary events. There's no point in insuring something that is guaranteed to happen eventually, like the breach of an unsecured network. This is exactly how health insurance works in the U.S., at least the better ones. It's in the insurance company's best interest to keep you healthy, so they incentivize things like regular doctor's visits and not smoking and stuff. It's the only way to get people's heads out of the sand and monetize the risk in the here and now to affect decisions before it's too late.