Rates: on average €0.25/kWh 3-phase drop: is standard for every premise, even a 1-bedroom apartment has it shortage in winter: no, Germany has been a net exporter of electricity for ages. Talks about shortages are usually corporate FUD.
To clarify: there is no tax euro spent on the electrical infrastructure. The conversion to renewable energy is financed by payment guarantees, which in turn are financed by the consumer. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_Renewable_Energy_Act.
Thank you for your explanation. Is it correct to say that the principle is similar to shutter glasses? But instead of occluding one eye at a time, one picture for exactly one perspective is shown at a given time, while the other perspectives (for different viewing directions) are not displayed. This is the reason for the high refresh rates needed.
Cracking a key is NP hard, and with sufficiently large keys you can not amass enough computing power to crack them. If you can convert it to a P problem the computing time is reduced to practical dimensions. I think this film is about a sidestep ('melt the sand') that converts NP problems to P problems.
Surprisingly, a good rule of thumb for any criminal is to stay clear of any cardinal sin.
Lust - don't let your dick make any decisions for you Greed - know when to stop Sloth - go the extra mile or else it might bite you Wrath - like lust, an emotion that can negatively influence your judgment Pride - the best criminal and the perfect crime is the one nobody knows about, and overconfidence leads to errors. Gluttony - excessive consumption raises suspicions Envy - don't try to outdo someone else. He is known for a reason.
The technique is promising, but the provided example video does not demonstrate a true advantage it has over conventional cinematography. They filmed with two cameras, one overexposing one underexposing, but they don't have one with the right exposure to compare with the composed HDR images. The city scenes are filmed at daylight, without any areas of high contrast that would make a high dynamic range necessary. The same with the people example, they even overdid it to give it a vibrant effect, making it more of an artistic tool than capturing shadows and lights naturally.
They should make a short film with city nighttime and desert scenes, that should be impressive. They should also contact director Michael Mann, he would jump at the opportunity to film HDR.
Nooo! It contains acetone or ethyl acetate, both of which are good solvents for most kinds of plastic, like your laptop handrest. It can seriously f%$# up the surface, making it look worse than with stickers.
I think the more important aspect of this is the quick gratification this system provides. With todays attention span you need to reward people quicker and more often, but smaller.
Anyway I can't wait for the first guy who goes "LEEROY JENKINS!" on his group assignment.
You realize that because you 'had the idea' before Google launched the actual implentation you now, per Slashdot convention, can claim that Google has not done anything new or novel.
Actually, yes. If google was about to patent the idea of the sidewiki alone it would be an excellent example not of prior art, but how trivial the idea itself is, and why the patent system needs to be reworked.
You could use glasses that are polarized the same for the left and right eye. That way at least you can get one normal image. Of course you would not see any 3D effect, but at least you don't need to stay out when your friends go to the movies.
Guard: Oh come on, be serious, if you aren't going to do this baggage check stuff properly don't do it at all. Now shove off!
Outcome: Guard doesn't believe such amazingly incriminating answer. Thinks you are obnoxious. Tells you to keep going.
I know you wrote that in jest but anyway, never EVER say something like that to a law enforcement officer. First he WILL arrest you, no matter how far in the cheek your tongue was, second he WILL get a search warrant for your house just to find anything to make a case. Then you will be forced to decrypt the container because if you don't all that is needed in court to convict you is the testimony of the officer.
No, that's an electrostatic force, not electromagnetic, and the force of matter interacting with other matter is not only comprised of that force alone.
And the difference between electrostatic and electromagnetic forces would be what? There is no reason to keep them apart, it's the same phenomenon. And what would that other force be that matter is interacting with outside of atoms, other than gravity?
Making it act over more than a few millimeters against a non-charged object (such as random space junk) is, at this point, not possible.
That is correct of course, as of now, but the parent poster made it look like it would be fundamentally impossible.
Well, there will have to be some major breakthroughs in physics for that to happen. Electromagnetics won't help much, because a lot of that junk is non-ferrous.
If I punch you, the force of the blow will be transfered from my fist to your body by nothing else than electromagnetism. You don't need to be ferromagnetic for this to work. The outer electrons of the outer atoms of your body will be repelled by the outer electrons of the outer atoms of my fist.
Outside of atoms, there are no forces other than gravity and electromagnetism.
No, I would think more of an inverted Chewbacca defense:
William Du Bois
Ladies and gentlemen of this supposed jury, the district attorney would certainly want you to believe that my client killed his wife. And they make a good case. Hell, even I almost think it was him! But, ladies and gentlemen of this supposed jury, I have one final thing I want you to consider. Ladies and gentlemen, this is Alan Turing. Turing was a Mathematician from England. He came up with what is now called a Turing Machine. Now think about it: that does make perfect sense! Paul Hora
Damn it! He's using the Turing Defense! William Du Bois
Now why would Alan Turing, a Mathematician from England would invent something like a Turing Machine? Because it helps to show that some problems are never solvable by computing. Does that make any sense? Yes it does. Imagine a Turing Machine and a set of instructions. Can anybody tell, if the machine, running those instructions will ever stop? And more important: can we program a Turing Machine, so that it decides whether a set of instructions would cause a Turing Machine to halt eventually? But more important, you have to ask yourself: What does this have to do with this case? Everything. Ladies and gentlemen, this case completedly depends on it! It does make a lot of sense! Look at me. I'm a lawyer defending a software engineer, and I'm talkin' about Alan Turing! Now how can it be, that this halting problem is undecideable? Because, if we hypotheticaly have a Turing Machine that solves the halting problem, we could use it to construct another Turing Machine that does not halt when it should, and thus, when given to itself to test for halting, would contradict its own behavior! Does that make sense? Ladies and gentlemen, I am making perfect sense! And so you have to remember, when you're in that jury room deliberatin' and conjugatin' the verdict, do you know wheter you will ever stop deliberatin'? No! Ladies and gentlemen of this supposed jury, you will never know! If the jury doesn't halt, you must acquit! The defense rests!
Is there something legally or morally wrong with two independent companies agreeing to what seems to amount to a partnership? The retailer obviously benefits from the agreement, otherwise they wouldn't have signed up; so does Intel.
By that logic bribery wouldn't be wrong as it benefits the briber and the bribee.
The market being based on price has little to do with it. It is simply not feasible to use highly integrated automation with products with lifecycles of 6-12 months max. Setting up the automatized process is costly and needs well trained workers, and any revision requieres it to be done again. Plus it is not easily adaptable to changing demand, whereas with manual labor you just shift your workers.
When I am writing something personal, I always end up over analyzing everything I write. I sit, rewrite, write it again, delete it all write again and it just seems to never end so it sounds "perfect."
It is the German "Arbeitnehmererfindungsgesetz", "employees' invention law". The employee receives a share of the earnings through patent royalties based on his involvement in the creation of the invention.
It considers the employees initiative and involvement in finding a new solution for a problem. How much exactly the employee is paid for is calculated in a complex formula. I could not find an english page about it but maybe you get the idea by looking at this http://www.arbeitnehmererfindungsgesetz.de/komment ar/verguetung.htm.
Slashdot Mirror
All 17 images were uploaded on the Docker Hub portal by the same person/group, using the pseudonym of "docker123321."
WHO THE FUCK pulls an image called docker123321/tomcat22 ?
I read that as "For Programmers, the Ultimate Office Perk is Avoiding MS Office Entirely" and nodded in agreement.
Yeah, I hate that. The last thing I want in this world is perks. Or income. Or stability.
If you have other ways of fulfillment in your life it is enough. If you live to code you burn out this way.
No need to print out the puzzle, somebody made an interactive version:
http://twoevils.net/cross-regex.html
Rates: on average €0.25/kWh
3-phase drop: is standard for every premise, even a 1-bedroom apartment has it
shortage in winter: no, Germany has been a net exporter of electricity for ages. Talks about shortages are usually corporate FUD.
To clarify: there is no tax euro spent on the electrical infrastructure. The conversion to renewable energy is financed by payment guarantees, which in turn are financed by the consumer. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_Renewable_Energy_Act.
Why didn't you just google 'neighboring right' and see that it indeed is the term to use: http://itlaw.wikia.com/wiki/Neighboring_rights
Thank you for your explanation. Is it correct to say that the principle is similar to shutter glasses? But instead of occluding one eye at a time, one picture for exactly one perspective is shown at a given time, while the other perspectives (for different viewing directions) are not displayed. This is the reason for the high refresh rates needed.
Cracking a key is NP hard, and with sufficiently large keys you can not amass enough computing power to crack them. If you can convert it to a P problem the computing time is reduced to practical dimensions. I think this film is about a sidestep ('melt the sand') that converts NP problems to P problems.
Surprisingly, a good rule of thumb for any criminal is to stay clear of any cardinal sin.
Lust - don't let your dick make any decisions for you
Greed - know when to stop
Sloth - go the extra mile or else it might bite you
Wrath - like lust, an emotion that can negatively influence your judgment
Pride - the best criminal and the perfect crime is the one nobody knows about, and overconfidence leads to errors.
Gluttony - excessive consumption raises suspicions
Envy - don't try to outdo someone else. He is known for a reason.
The road to hell is paved with good intentions and the toll is collected by hysterical parents.
The technique is promising, but the provided example video does not demonstrate a true advantage it has over conventional cinematography. They filmed with two cameras, one overexposing one underexposing, but they don't have one with the right exposure to compare with the composed HDR images. The city scenes are filmed at daylight, without any areas of high contrast that would make a high dynamic range necessary. The same with the people example, they even overdid it to give it a vibrant effect, making it more of an artistic tool than capturing shadows and lights naturally.
They should make a short film with city nighttime and desert scenes, that should be impressive. They should also contact director Michael Mann, he would jump at the opportunity to film HDR.
Nooo! It contains acetone or ethyl acetate, both of which are good solvents for most kinds of plastic, like your laptop handrest. It can seriously f%$# up the surface, making it look worse than with stickers.
On metal or glass it works great though.
I think the more important aspect of this is the quick gratification this system provides. With todays attention span you need to reward people quicker and more often, but smaller.
Anyway I can't wait for the first guy who goes "LEEROY JENKINS!" on his group assignment.
I use the leaking pipe analogy: While the pipe is leaking and I look for the leak we are at 0%, when I found the leak and sealed it we are at 100%.
You realize that because you 'had the idea' before Google launched the actual implentation you now, per Slashdot convention, can claim that Google has not done anything new or novel.
Actually, yes. If google was about to patent the idea of the sidewiki alone it would be an excellent example not of prior art, but how trivial the idea itself is, and why the patent system needs to be reworked.
I think the author equates nose picking with eating one's boogers, Mucophagy. I would really like to know why people do THAT.
As for nose-picking itself, since humans are dry-nosed primates, drying of mucus in the nose is natural and cleaning it out is as well.
You could use glasses that are polarized the same for the left and right eye. That way at least you can get one normal image. Of course you would not see any 3D effect, but at least you don't need to stay out when your friends go to the movies.
"Its a gig of encrypted kiddie pr0n."
Guard: Oh come on, be serious, if you aren't going to do this baggage check stuff properly don't do it at all. Now shove off!
Outcome: Guard doesn't believe such amazingly incriminating answer. Thinks you are obnoxious. Tells you to keep going.
I know you wrote that in jest but anyway, never EVER say something like that to a law enforcement officer. First he WILL arrest you, no matter how far in the cheek your tongue was, second he WILL get a search warrant for your house just to find anything to make a case. Then you will be forced to decrypt the container because if you don't all that is needed in court to convict you is the testimony of the officer.
No, that's an electrostatic force, not electromagnetic, and the force of matter interacting with other matter is not only comprised of that force alone.
And the difference between electrostatic and electromagnetic forces would be what? There is no reason to keep them apart, it's the same phenomenon. And what would that other force be that matter is interacting with outside of atoms, other than gravity?
Making it act over more than a few millimeters against a non-charged object (such as random space junk) is, at this point, not possible.
That is correct of course, as of now, but the parent poster made it look like it would be fundamentally impossible.
Well, there will have to be some major breakthroughs in physics for that to happen. Electromagnetics won't help much, because a lot of that junk is non-ferrous.
If I punch you, the force of the blow will be transfered from my fist to your body by nothing else than electromagnetism. You don't need to be ferromagnetic for this to work. The outer electrons of the outer atoms of your body will be repelled by the outer electrons of the outer atoms of my fist.
Outside of atoms, there are no forces other than gravity and electromagnetism.
William Du Bois Ladies and gentlemen of this supposed jury, the district attorney would certainly want you to believe that my client killed his wife. And they make a good case. Hell, even I almost think it was him! But, ladies and gentlemen of this supposed jury, I have one final thing I want you to consider. Ladies and gentlemen, this is Alan Turing. Turing was a Mathematician from England. He came up with what is now called a Turing Machine. Now think about it: that does make perfect sense! Paul Hora Damn it! He's using the Turing Defense! William Du Bois Now why would Alan Turing, a Mathematician from England would invent something like a Turing Machine? Because it helps to show that some problems are never solvable by computing. Does that make any sense? Yes it does.
Imagine a Turing Machine and a set of instructions. Can anybody tell, if the machine, running those instructions will ever stop? And more important: can we program a Turing Machine, so that it decides whether a set of instructions would cause a Turing Machine to halt eventually? But more important, you have to ask yourself: What does this have to do with this case? Everything. Ladies and gentlemen, this case completedly depends on it! It does make a lot of sense! Look at me. I'm a lawyer defending a software engineer, and I'm talkin' about Alan Turing!
Now how can it be, that this halting problem is undecideable? Because, if we hypotheticaly have a Turing Machine that solves the halting problem, we could use it to construct another Turing Machine that does not halt when it should, and thus, when given to itself to test for halting, would contradict its own behavior!
Does that make sense? Ladies and gentlemen, I am making perfect sense! And so you have to remember, when you're in that jury room deliberatin' and conjugatin' the verdict, do you know wheter you will ever stop deliberatin'? No! Ladies and gentlemen of this supposed jury, you will never know! If the jury doesn't halt, you must acquit! The defense rests!
Is there something legally or morally wrong with two independent companies agreeing to what seems to amount to a partnership? The retailer obviously benefits from the agreement, otherwise they wouldn't have signed up; so does Intel.
By that logic bribery wouldn't be wrong as it benefits the briber and the bribee.
The market being based on price has little to do with it. It is simply not feasible to use highly integrated automation with products with lifecycles of 6-12 months max. Setting up the automatized process is costly and needs well trained workers, and any revision requieres it to be done again. Plus it is not easily adaptable to changing demand, whereas with manual labor you just shift your workers.
When I am writing something personal, I always end up over analyzing everything I write. I sit, rewrite, write it again, delete it all write again and it just seems to never end so it sounds "perfect."
Sounds like Obsessive-compulsive personality disorder to me.
It is the German "Arbeitnehmererfindungsgesetz", "employees' invention law". The employee receives a share of the earnings through patent royalties based on his involvement in the creation of the invention.
t ar/verguetung.htm.
It considers the employees initiative and involvement in finding a new solution for a problem. How much exactly the employee is paid for is calculated in a complex formula. I could not find an english page about it but maybe you get the idea by looking at this http://www.arbeitnehmererfindungsgesetz.de/kommen