A whole lot of string and pull switches. My dad did the whole basement lighting system that way, back in '79. As for scheduling, rig something up with egg timers. Eye hooks, duct tape, and popsickle sticks are also recommended. Maybe a toaster and a pulley. YMMV.
If you haven't noticed the proliferation of the CC licenses recently, you haven't been on the web. This is happening because it's an identifiable mark, a simple concept, and the options are easy to understand. If you can get something like this, it should go like Go Dog Go!
PRT (Personal Rapid Transit) systems like this one are demand driven, meaning that when you show up at the station, you take the first available car. During peak times you may have to wait a minute or two, but during off-peak times there will be one right there.
So you can have what you want, when you want, for how much you want it (unless a measly $1-2 is too much for you)
The idea behind Personal Rapid Transit systems is that you travel alone or with whoever you like by choice. The only reason someone should be getting in with you is because you are travelling with them. The car then travels nonstop to your destination.
As for issues of personal security, consider the following:
The service is demand driven, so that when you arive at the station, you take the first available car to your destination. during peak periods there may be some waiting (usually less than 2 minutes), but during off-peak times (ie late at night) there will always be a car waiting for you to board immediately
The stations are small, well lit, and monitored by video cameras (the Taxi2000 concept recommends continuous video buffering, so that if a security person monitoring the situation spots a problem, the last few minutes of recorded video can be permanently stored for evidence). There could also be similar cameras in the cars.
Each car will posess both a button to cause the car to stop at the next available station (to allow a quick get away) and a button to take it to the nearest police station (which overrides the first button).
Each of these features would make it difficult to get away with any crime committed on these vehicles, and together would form a good psychological deterent to anyone considering something illegal. You'd probably be in more danger walking to the parking lot.
It's specifically targetted at Linux and other Free or Open software, which ammounts to M$'s principal competitors. This sounds just like the Netscape case. ObIANALNDIPOOTV (Obviously, I Am Not A Lawyer Nor Do I Play One On TV), but I hope there's a lawyer out there looking at this. Red Hat just broke even, maybe they've got some money.... They also are one of the most clearly injured parties in this (not because they ARE Linux (they're not), but because they make money on Linux and are percieved to be the largest player in the Linux space).
Okay, so, like, I log on to slashdot to see what's up and I see everyone jumping for joy that the paperclip will be gone, great. I am just as sick of that twisted metal annoying b*st*rd as anyone else here.
But think about this a minute. They're using the removal of this "Feature" as a selling point for Office XP. Buy XP or be stuck with that stupid thing for the rest of your life. How do we know there's not another more annoying character buried deep inside Office XP, waiting to show up when they want you to upgrade to Office Plaid, or whatever their next version is. What if you upgrade, and two years from now Clippy Jr. shows up with his whole annoying family?
In building my skills, I've built a number of Access databases. The first few were just the kind of kludge you're talking about, but I got better. If you want these kind of users to switch you need to be able to let them port their 'kludgy' databases easily.
So why is there no direct Access equivalent for GNOME or KDE?
(GNOME Basic and KBasic are steps in the right direction, but there's no app that will take a VBA coded Access database and present it in the same way.)
Unitl this exists, alot of small office environments will be a tough sell.
(Not sure if this posted the first time so I'm trying again)
When the court ruled against them, MP3.COM offered to
settle with the recording industry. As leverage, they threatened to notify the Copyright Office that every
recording industry copyright registration (which all say that the songs are works for hire) entered since 1978
was defective. According to the Copyright Act of 1976, copyright registrations must essentially be accurate
and free of knowing mistakes. According to the Copyright Office's regulations, if you register a copyright
and knowingly include false statements (including whether or not it is a work for hite), the Register of
Copyrights will revoke your registration.
Does this mean that ANYONE can inform the copyright office about an incorrect copyright filing and have the registration revoked?
Sounds like someone could have a lot of fun at the RIAA's expense, and all it would cost would be postage;-}
Seriously though, there's nothing saying you have to charge for content, just that you could. Not charging means lower bandwidth costs for everybody. OTOH, if you put up a piece of Free (Libre, not Gratis) software you could collect the fees from it yourself and still be complying with the GPL (there are no restrictions on transfer, just earmarking of metered bandwidth), or you could donate your fees to the FSF, EFF or any other cause that strikes your fancy.
Ok, so I'm not a mathematical genius, and someone else thought of this in 1849, but I was bored one night in 1986 while working as a security guard and fiddled myself up something similar. (13 months starting with 0, "monthless" new-year, leap years handled by adding an extra day to new-year). I hadn't gone so far as renaming the months or the days, but I talked it up with my shift working co-workers, and got a suprisingly strong resistance to always having things happen on the same day. It went something like this:
"If you were born on a Saturday and I was born on a Wednesday, I'd never get to get pissed on my birthday! THAT'S COMMUNISM!!!"
Okay, so season 8 of 'X-Files' is upon us and what have we got.
A principal character leaving the series (Mulder).
A 'love story' (Mulder/Scully) which can't continue without said character (Okay, there are still people who don't want to see this, but it is central to the series).
Another principal character who's storyline is basically defined by Mulder's (Scully: please don't flame me on this; 'the Enigmatic Dr. Scully' is one of the most interesting characters on television), and who may not continue past this season when Gillian Anderson's contract ends.
A sizable chunk of the interesting secondary characters (the Lone Gunmen) being given their own show.
And
A new guy (I don't envy Robert Patrick here) who will probably be blamed for everything when the series tanks.
Don't they remember what happened when they replaced the 'Duke Boys'? (*g*)
If you look at franchise series that are successful (Star Trek being a prime example), they tend to be built on ensemble casts, with overarching storylines involving everybody in some way. Whenever a character leaves, there are still established characters you care about who take on larger storylines. A replacement, if needed, is given time to establish something new by giving other characters more of the limelight. And finally, if a given series and cast has run it's course, it is retired and replaced by a new one, with at least a shared mythology and frequently characters from previous series.
The current series is running out of steam. With the Gunmen gone, the only remaining characters who can carry a show are Scully, Skinner, and Krycek. Robert Patrick is a good actor, but I can't see his character meshing with the established main storyline enough for us to care.
The solution, IMHO, would be as follows:
Either kill off or send away both Scully and Mulder. (Sending them off somewhere would be better. It would also make more movies possible). If you keep them alive, give them some kind of closure (either on the small screen or the large), then bring them back as guests when the situation demands it.
Concentrate on the Gunmen series
If you have to keep a second series going, create something with a stronger ensemble cast (here's an idea: X-Files Black Ops - a secret special ops team at war with the Consortium).
If none of these are an option, do the smart thing : Just end it.
But it seems to me that privacy as a concept is somewhat outdated and needs to be reevaluated in light of social and technological changes. Our society is increasingly reliant upon the fruits of technology, and despite what people think, this change is inherently at odds with the notion of personal privacy.
I think that the real issues surrounding privacy aren't just what information is being collected, but whether or not it is being used for what the collector said it was for. If I provide my DNA information to a drug company, for example, using it to make medication for me is one thing, provided that's what I gave it to them for, but selling it to insurance companies or funeral homes, or even using it for their own marketing is something else.
Perhaps there should be statutory limits on reuse of information, and an expiration date on sensitive data after which it must be destroyed.
seriously, if he knows what is good for him he'll hire that woman from Matrix. You know the one, Trinity was her name... She is a bomb shell.
Carrie Anne Moss, a fellow Canadian
It would totally throw a new twist in to X-Files. The beauty of the show so far has been the sexual tension, the pretty people (who hasn't had fantasy's about Scully? Only those who've had them about Mulder...) and then the geeky stuff. Everybody is expecting some new man to fill the roll. A woman would be different.
Why not add Britney Spears as well?
VO : Once upon a time there were three young ladies who worked for the FBI. And they each had very promising careers. But I took them away from all that. And now they work for me. My name... is Mulder.
Slashdot Mirror
A whole lot of string and pull switches. My dad did the whole basement lighting system that way, back in '79. As for scheduling, rig something up with egg timers. Eye hooks, duct tape, and popsickle sticks are also recommended. Maybe a toaster and a pulley. YMMV.
I was gonna go all Rats of NIMH...
mod this up, I agree wholeheartedly.
If you haven't noticed the proliferation of the CC licenses recently, you haven't been on the web. This is happening because it's an identifiable mark, a simple concept, and the options are easy to understand. If you can get something like this, it should go like Go Dog Go!
How long till they put the fat one's head on a stick?
How about "Payola"?
"(squeek) kill me (squeek) kill me...."
Cheer.
In the case of public domain books, having a link to the appropriate files on Project Gutenberg would be nice
Cheap is cool, small is cool, A supercomputer for nothing, that's really cool.
Wouldn't that just make you more thirsty?
PRT (Personal Rapid Transit) systems like this one are demand driven, meaning that when you show up at the station, you take the first available car. During peak times you may have to wait a minute or two, but during off-peak times there will be one right there.
So you can have what you want, when you want, for how much you want it (unless a measly $1-2 is too much for you)
As for issues of personal security, consider the following:
The service is demand driven, so that when you arive at the station, you take the first available car to your destination. during peak periods there may be some waiting (usually less than 2 minutes), but during off-peak times (ie late at night) there will always be a car waiting for you to board immediately
The stations are small, well lit, and monitored by video cameras (the Taxi2000 concept recommends continuous video buffering, so that if a security person monitoring the situation spots a problem, the last few minutes of recorded video can be permanently stored for evidence). There could also be similar cameras in the cars.
Each car will posess both a button to cause the car to stop at the next available station (to allow a quick get away) and a button to take it to the nearest police station (which overrides the first button).
Each of these features would make it difficult to get away with any crime committed on these vehicles, and together would form a good psychological deterent to anyone considering something illegal. You'd probably be in more danger walking to the parking lot.
Isn't this an anti-trust case waiting to happen?
It's specifically targetted at Linux and other Free or Open software, which ammounts to M$'s principal competitors. This sounds just like the Netscape case. ObIANALNDIPOOTV (Obviously, I Am Not A Lawyer Nor Do I Play One On TV), but I hope there's a lawyer out there looking at this. Red Hat just broke even, maybe they've got some money.... They also are one of the most clearly injured parties in this (not because they ARE Linux (they're not), but because they make money on Linux and are percieved to be the largest player in the Linux space).
But think about this a minute. They're using the removal of this "Feature" as a selling point for Office XP. Buy XP or be stuck with that stupid thing for the rest of your life. How do we know there's not another more annoying character buried deep inside Office XP, waiting to show up when they want you to upgrade to Office Plaid, or whatever their next version is. What if you upgrade, and two years from now Clippy Jr. shows up with his whole annoying family?
How much will you pay to get rid of that!
So why is there no direct Access equivalent for GNOME or KDE?
(GNOME Basic and KBasic are steps in the right direction, but there's no app that will take a VBA coded Access database and present it in the same way.)
Unitl this exists, alot of small office environments will be a tough sell.
When the court ruled against them, MP3.COM offered to settle with the recording industry. As leverage, they threatened to notify the Copyright Office that every recording industry copyright registration (which all say that the songs are works for hire) entered since 1978 was defective. According to the Copyright Act of 1976, copyright registrations must essentially be accurate and free of knowing mistakes. According to the Copyright Office's regulations, if you register a copyright and knowingly include false statements (including whether or not it is a work for hite), the Register of Copyrights will revoke your registration.
Does this mean that ANYONE can inform the copyright office about an incorrect copyright filing and have the registration revoked?
Sounds like someone could have a lot of fun at the RIAA's expense, and all it would cost would be postage ;-}
Seriously though, there's nothing saying you have to charge for content, just that you could. Not charging means lower bandwidth costs for everybody. OTOH, if you put up a piece of Free (Libre, not Gratis) software you could collect the fees from it yourself and still be complying with the GPL (there are no restrictions on transfer, just earmarking of metered bandwidth), or you could donate your fees to the FSF, EFF or any other cause that strikes your fancy.
I think the appropriate person to claim prior art would be my mother. Wait till she tells all of her friends at bridge that she's a big time inventor!
"If you were born on a Saturday and I was born on a Wednesday, I'd never get to get pissed on my birthday! THAT'S COMMUNISM!!!"
(or words to that effect).
Actually, it would be really cool to have a video compression algorithm with that level of shrinkage.
DiVX (MPEG-4) copy of the Matrix - 650 Meg - Download Time 6hrs
WaVX (Super Ultra 12 x compressed thingie) - 54 Meg - Download Time 30 Minutes
How long before Jack Valenti has a coronary?
A principal character leaving the series (Mulder).
A 'love story' (Mulder/Scully) which can't continue without said character (Okay, there are still people who don't want to see this, but it is central to the series).
Another principal character who's storyline is basically defined by Mulder's (Scully: please don't flame me on this; 'the Enigmatic Dr. Scully' is one of the most interesting characters on television), and who may not continue past this season when Gillian Anderson's contract ends.
A sizable chunk of the interesting secondary characters (the Lone Gunmen) being given their own show.
And
A new guy (I don't envy Robert Patrick here) who will probably be blamed for everything when the series tanks.
Don't they remember what happened when they replaced the 'Duke Boys'? (*g*)
If you look at franchise series that are successful (Star Trek being a prime example), they tend to be built on ensemble casts, with overarching storylines involving everybody in some way. Whenever a character leaves, there are still established characters you care about who take on larger storylines. A replacement, if needed, is given time to establish something new by giving other characters more of the limelight. And finally, if a given series and cast has run it's course, it is retired and replaced by a new one, with at least a shared mythology and frequently characters from previous series.
The current series is running out of steam. With the Gunmen gone, the only remaining characters who can carry a show are Scully, Skinner, and Krycek. Robert Patrick is a good actor, but I can't see his character meshing with the established main storyline enough for us to care.
The solution, IMHO, would be as follows:
Either kill off or send away both Scully and Mulder. (Sending them off somewhere would be better. It would also make more movies possible). If you keep them alive, give them some kind of closure (either on the small screen or the large), then bring them back as guests when the situation demands it.
Concentrate on the Gunmen series
If you have to keep a second series going, create something with a stronger ensemble cast (here's an idea: X-Files Black Ops - a secret special ops team at war with the Consortium).
If none of these are an option, do the smart thing : Just end it.
I think that the real issues surrounding privacy aren't just what information is being collected, but whether or not it is being used for what the collector said it was for. If I provide my DNA information to a drug company, for example, using it to make medication for me is one thing, provided that's what I gave it to them for, but selling it to insurance companies or funeral homes, or even using it for their own marketing is something else.
Perhaps there should be statutory limits on reuse of information, and an expiration date on sensitive data after which it must be destroyed.
Carrie Anne Moss, a fellow Canadian
It would totally throw a new twist in to X-Files. The beauty of the show so far has been the sexual tension, the pretty people (who hasn't had fantasy's about Scully? Only those who've had them about Mulder...) and then the geeky stuff. Everybody is expecting some new man to fill the roll. A woman would be different.
Why not add Britney Spears as well?
VO : Once upon a time there were three young ladies who worked for the FBI. And they each had very promising careers. But I took them away from all that. And now they work for me. My name... is Mulder.
Didya see Hollywood A.D.?