The NSF isn't developing anything. The NSF has created a program that funds large scale research grants to universities. In this case, the grant is to a collaboration of several large universities to explore ways to meet this goal.
If you click through the article and then to the page about the project, including the universities involved in the collaboration (MIT, Cornell, Michigan, UPenn, etc...), you can see actual useful information:
https://excape.cis.upenn.edu/i...
I've worked extensively with Camera Mouse (http://www.cameramouse.org/) and a few other technologies.
- Voice recognition such as Dragon works very well and can be used to to do some mouse pointing and other interaction tasks in addition to regular dictation. - In addition to trackballs they make accessible joysticks that have large "kush" balls on the top that let you use more gross motor functions. - All sorts of accessible keyboards or button pads can be used with a variety of software.
The "descriptions and accounts" part essentially means that a transcript of what the announcers say would be copyrighted, and a press release describing the outcome of the game would be copyrighted.
I made their first website around 1995 or so. I wonder if it's still kicking around the museum somewhere - it would certainly be vintage communications by today's standards. Hopefully it didn't have too many blink tags!
Check out the Eagle Eyes project at Boston College. They have over 10 years experience working with people with severe communication impairments. http://www.bc.edu/schools/csom...
This is completely absurd. They have to know right away whether or not their website logins were vulnerable (that is, were they running OpenSSL with the bug) or whether they were running other versions of SSL without heartbleed.
It's a black and white situation. There's no gray middle ground.
When the constitution was written, the only forms of long distance communication involved horses and either yelling or writing on paper. The founders could not have foreseen things like a telephone or even the internet. The danger posed by mass communication and instant spread of ideas is too strong to overlook. Things like "twitter revolutions" and "cyberbulling" and "anonymous slashdot comments" are a danger to society. Therefore, the first amendment should be rewritten to specifically include only communications spread orally or written by horseback.
If you take away the second amendment, there is *nothing* preventing the above from happening.
The second amendment protects all of the other amendments. Even though we live in a modern and peaceful society today, there is nothing that guarantees this will continue in the long run. Civilizations rise and fall - almost always due to the failure of centralized power. Weakened and dependent populations survive only based on centralized power - when it falls so do the people. Strong, independent, and empowered people survive *despite* the failure of centralized power.
IEEE Spectrum is a magazine sort of like Popular Science except it's based on reality.
Articles are geared for the general techie/engineer type and don't rely on you knowing specific fields.
http://spectrum.ieee.org/
The complete sentence continues "others may share illegal material through your router, giving the appearance that you are the guilty party." You cannot take the part of a sentence before a semicolon and ignore the rest that qualifies the situation and then call the whole thing "flat-out, inexcusably, wrong." If others share illegal material through your router, that in fact would be an example of copyright infringement. Your interpretation is "flat-out, inexcusably, wrong."
I'm assuming you're an undergrad, otherwise you would know enough about going to conferences.
As an undergrad, getting even one publication goes a LONG way towards getting into grad school. As noted by others, incremental work in computer science is published in conference proceedings. Some conferences are very prestigious and hard to get into, or focus on a very specific topic, others are more open to a wider range of topics and aren't as selective. Be careful of some of the "junk" conferences which seemingly only exist to get junk worked published in some form. Once you have a few publications, expect at least 1 junk conference spam email per day, such as "Your paper has been accepted to XXX" even though you didn't submit to anything.
Aside from meeting people, going to conferences gives you a chance to see what other people are doing as they present it. You can ask questions and gather more insight out of it than just reading the same research on paper. You can go talk with people and discuss your ideas, and maybe find new collaborators.
This is seriously frivolous. These vulture lawyers are the only ones who would get anything out of this even if they do win.
All of the analogies above are valid. Don't broadcast something you don't want people to pick up. It's common sense.
I really hope this gets thrown out and they are made to pay Google's legal costs.
My school district decided NOT to teach grammar and writing. The thinking was that the students would just absorb it from the environment or something.
I didn't learn about conjugating verbs until I took French in high school.
As a Ph.D. student this still haunts me when my adviser has to correct such things in paper submissions. English is her second language...
That's an important point left out of the post. If they did this all in secret that's a much bigger deal than if people were drinking out of marked bottles.
I'm not sure it's worth it to mix Python 2.6 and 3.0 in the same book. Of course there's always the possibility that you will inherit some code from either version, but in the course of learning the language I think it's best to pick one path and stick with it.
I teach introductory programming with Python and we have stuck with 2.6 at least until most resources catch up to the 3.0 changes.
Slashdot Mirror
Serenity
You can configure this setting in Firefox. It doesn't look like Chrome has a similar configuration.
http://kb.mozillazine.org/Abou...
network.http.max-persistent-connections-per-server - default = 6
Try setting this to 1.
Source:
https://support.mozilla.org/t5...
The NSF isn't developing anything. The NSF has created a program that funds large scale research grants to universities. In this case, the grant is to a collaboration of several large universities to explore ways to meet this goal. If you click through the article and then to the page about the project, including the universities involved in the collaboration (MIT, Cornell, Michigan, UPenn, etc...), you can see actual useful information: https://excape.cis.upenn.edu/i...
Learn some soft skills to bring your career to the next level:
^^^ mod this up. Good summary.
I've worked extensively with Camera Mouse (http://www.cameramouse.org/) and a few other technologies.
- Voice recognition such as Dragon works very well and can be used to to do some mouse pointing and other interaction tasks in addition to regular dictation.
- In addition to trackballs they make accessible joysticks that have large "kush" balls on the top that let you use more gross motor functions.
- All sorts of accessible keyboards or button pads can be used with a variety of software.
This is the only post to get it right so far.
The "descriptions and accounts" part essentially means that a transcript of what the announcers say would be copyrighted, and a press release describing the outcome of the game would be copyrighted.
I made their first website around 1995 or so. I wonder if it's still kicking around the museum somewhere - it would certainly be vintage communications by today's standards. Hopefully it didn't have too many blink tags!
Check out the Eagle Eyes project at Boston College. They have over 10 years experience working with people with severe communication impairments.
http://www.bc.edu/schools/csom...
The system is available through Opportunity Foundation of America:
http://opportunityfoundationof...
If the person can move their head, they may be able to use the Camera Mouse: http://www.cameramouse.org/ (Free download)
This is completely absurd. They have to know right away whether or not their website logins were vulnerable (that is, were they running OpenSSL with the bug) or whether they were running other versions of SSL without heartbleed. It's a black and white situation. There's no gray middle ground.
When the constitution was written, the only forms of long distance communication involved horses and either yelling or writing on paper. The founders could not have foreseen things like a telephone or even the internet. The danger posed by mass communication and instant spread of ideas is too strong to overlook. Things like "twitter revolutions" and "cyberbulling" and "anonymous slashdot comments" are a danger to society. Therefore, the first amendment should be rewritten to specifically include only communications spread orally or written by horseback. If you take away the second amendment, there is *nothing* preventing the above from happening. The second amendment protects all of the other amendments. Even though we live in a modern and peaceful society today, there is nothing that guarantees this will continue in the long run. Civilizations rise and fall - almost always due to the failure of centralized power. Weakened and dependent populations survive only based on centralized power - when it falls so do the people. Strong, independent, and empowered people survive *despite* the failure of centralized power.
IEEE Spectrum is a magazine sort of like Popular Science except it's based on reality. Articles are geared for the general techie/engineer type and don't rely on you knowing specific fields. http://spectrum.ieee.org/
The complete sentence continues "others may share illegal material through your router, giving the appearance that you are the guilty party." You cannot take the part of a sentence before a semicolon and ignore the rest that qualifies the situation and then call the whole thing "flat-out, inexcusably, wrong." If others share illegal material through your router, that in fact would be an example of copyright infringement. Your interpretation is "flat-out, inexcusably, wrong."
I'm assuming you're an undergrad, otherwise you would know enough about going to conferences. As an undergrad, getting even one publication goes a LONG way towards getting into grad school. As noted by others, incremental work in computer science is published in conference proceedings. Some conferences are very prestigious and hard to get into, or focus on a very specific topic, others are more open to a wider range of topics and aren't as selective. Be careful of some of the "junk" conferences which seemingly only exist to get junk worked published in some form. Once you have a few publications, expect at least 1 junk conference spam email per day, such as "Your paper has been accepted to XXX" even though you didn't submit to anything. Aside from meeting people, going to conferences gives you a chance to see what other people are doing as they present it. You can ask questions and gather more insight out of it than just reading the same research on paper. You can go talk with people and discuss your ideas, and maybe find new collaborators.
This is seriously frivolous. These vulture lawyers are the only ones who would get anything out of this even if they do win. All of the analogies above are valid. Don't broadcast something you don't want people to pick up. It's common sense. I really hope this gets thrown out and they are made to pay Google's legal costs.
My school district decided NOT to teach grammar and writing. The thinking was that the students would just absorb it from the environment or something. I didn't learn about conjugating verbs until I took French in high school. As a Ph.D. student this still haunts me when my adviser has to correct such things in paper submissions. English is her second language...
That's an important point left out of the post. If they did this all in secret that's a much bigger deal than if people were drinking out of marked bottles.
I'm not sure it's worth it to mix Python 2.6 and 3.0 in the same book. Of course there's always the possibility that you will inherit some code from either version, but in the course of learning the language I think it's best to pick one path and stick with it. I teach introductory programming with Python and we have stuck with 2.6 at least until most resources catch up to the 3.0 changes.