Oh, sure. Satellites can get pretty good for landscapes. We know military satellites can get 10" resolution because they've admitted it, but at that scale people (lying down for maximum area) are around 3x7 pixel blobs.
Better resolution than that tends to require aerial photography, because you can't get satellites much closer than the military does without hitting the atmosphere.
I was talking about drones. A satellite is no good for peeping tom type photos; between atmospheric interference and issues relating to focusing light at visible wavelengths, it's not feasible to get that kind of resolution from that high.
well, it would be pretty easy for the law to specify aircraft and either explicitly or not, disavow "spacecraft outside of atmosphere" which covers every functional satellite. But in practice I expect they just won't worry about it until non-governmental entities can reasonably afford to loft a satellite with good enough optics to care about.
the fact that it can be smaller and therefore less noticeable than a person with a camera, presumably. Possibly also the fact that it can be in the yard while the operator is not, thereby calling into question whether it can be considered trespassing.
I think he meant that because Rightscorp isn't a government, they cannot initiate criminal proceedings, just civil proceedings, and under civil proceedings, there's no presumption of innocence or need to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, just "preponderance of evidence". If the FBI got into it, then presumption of innocence would come into play. But at the scale Rightscorp likes to try to play, the FBI doesn't want to deal (too many folks, too little money involved).
So essentially, it's highly likely that if Rightscorp is taking an interest in you and a court gets involved, it's a civil case and presumption of innocence is not applicable.
I dunno. Most of the people I know with iphones have asked Siri "where can I hide the bodies" because she has a funny answer (starts looking up quarries, if I recall). Of course, if any of them had become murder suspects shortly thereafter, it could have been a problem, but if Apple reported all of those, the police would probably give up after the first few as a waste of time.
Many things have worked better, as long as the guy on top was capable and uncorrupted. The problem is that eventually there's a successor who can't handle it, and then it all falls down.
I kind of like it. Nothing would get done, because it would be unlikely to get enough people to agree, and most of the time that would be the right thing:)
Gotta keep a really close eye on the lottery mechanism, though, to prevent stacking the deck.
But it'll never happen here; the existing system has too many people with too much invested to let that big an amendment pass.
one trigger to tolerating excessive disparity, that was. In the simulation, if the top isn't skimming off too much, the rank and file are still better off than the egalitarians, which would make the heirarchy worth it even in the absence of difficulty leaving. It's when the top is raking off too much that the rank and file start wanting to jump ship.
I think until you establish that they dislike electric cars, it's very difficult to declare that a coincidence or not. Now, since it's established that their states contain a number of established NASA contractors, notably Boeing and (something like) United Launch, that we can say _that's_ not a coincidence.
The F35's best weapon against a WW1-2 biplane might be the sonic boom. (There was a story along these lines in some issue of Analog in I think the 70s.)
last I tried it (admittedly, a couple of years ago), even blizzard's torrent-based downloads were pretty slow. Extracting the torrent file and handing it to Azureus was normally vastly faster. I'm not sure what they were doing differently.
Re:And this is the same for copyrights.
on
Patents That Kill
·
· Score: 1
Ah, that makes sense. The "it's not really the same but it really is" approach.
Re:And this is the same for copyrights.
on
Patents That Kill
·
· Score: 1
I am not allowed to quote from a book I have purchased on a street corner, because that's a "public performance".
Re:And this is the same for copyrights.
on
Patents That Kill
·
· Score: 1
I don't mind it supporting them. I do mind the generations who grow up with that work being around and part of the culture not being able to legally do anything with it (fanfic, mashups, whatever) until the author dies.
Re:And this is the same for copyrights.
on
Patents That Kill
·
· Score: 1
I don't see how that would help. "Okay, it's not the same drug. So the original formula is still free to use now that the patent applying to it has expired." All you're losing is the "new feature". Are they able to use that to keep the original drug locked up, or is it a "you gotta get the new shiney, the old and busted is crap now" situation?
Slashdot Mirror
Also uses planes, apparently since 2012
I did mention aerial photography. Although Google uses the word satellite, most of the high-resolution imagery of cities is aerial photography taken from aircraft flying at 800 feet (240 m) to 1,500 feet (460 m); however, most of the other imagery is from satellites.
Oh, sure. Satellites can get pretty good for landscapes. We know military satellites can get 10" resolution because they've admitted it, but at that scale people (lying down for maximum area) are around 3x7 pixel blobs.
Better resolution than that tends to require aerial photography, because you can't get satellites much closer than the military does without hitting the atmosphere.
I was talking about drones. A satellite is no good for peeping tom type photos; between atmospheric interference and issues relating to focusing light at visible wavelengths, it's not feasible to get that kind of resolution from that high.
well, it would be pretty easy for the law to specify aircraft and either explicitly or not, disavow "spacecraft outside of atmosphere" which covers every functional satellite. But in practice I expect they just won't worry about it until non-governmental entities can reasonably afford to loft a satellite with good enough optics to care about.
the fact that it can be smaller and therefore less noticeable than a person with a camera, presumably. Possibly also the fact that it can be in the yard while the operator is not, thereby calling into question whether it can be considered trespassing.
I think he meant that because Rightscorp isn't a government, they cannot initiate criminal proceedings, just civil proceedings, and under civil proceedings, there's no presumption of innocence or need to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, just "preponderance of evidence". If the FBI got into it, then presumption of innocence would come into play. But at the scale Rightscorp likes to try to play, the FBI doesn't want to deal (too many folks, too little money involved).
So essentially, it's highly likely that if Rightscorp is taking an interest in you and a court gets involved, it's a civil case and presumption of innocence is not applicable.
racketeering?
Aha! The superclass of the Streisand Effect!
is it so good that eating it will put you in a comma?
Thenk yew, thenk yew, tip your waitress and try the veal.
it's probably sturdier than the biplane, but you don't want the fragments to get sucked into the jet; the F35 only has one engine :)
I dunno. Most of the people I know with iphones have asked Siri "where can I hide the bodies" because she has a funny answer (starts looking up quarries, if I recall). Of course, if any of them had become murder suspects shortly thereafter, it could have been a problem, but if Apple reported all of those, the police would probably give up after the first few as a waste of time.
Many things have worked better, as long as the guy on top was capable and uncorrupted. The problem is that eventually there's a successor who can't handle it, and then it all falls down.
"Only a Sith" seems pretty absolute all by itself :)
I kind of like it. Nothing would get done, because it would be unlikely to get enough people to agree, and most of the time that would be the right thing :)
Gotta keep a really close eye on the lottery mechanism, though, to prevent stacking the deck.
But it'll never happen here; the existing system has too many people with too much invested to let that big an amendment pass.
It's not proof of correctness, certainly, but it is evidence of plausibility. How much weight it has is of course up to you.
one trigger to tolerating excessive disparity, that was. In the simulation, if the top isn't skimming off too much, the rank and file are still better off than the egalitarians, which would make the heirarchy worth it even in the absence of difficulty leaving. It's when the top is raking off too much that the rank and file start wanting to jump ship.
I think until you establish that they dislike electric cars, it's very difficult to declare that a coincidence or not. Now, since it's established that their states contain a number of established NASA contractors, notably Boeing and (something like) United Launch, that we can say _that's_ not a coincidence.
The F35's best weapon against a WW1-2 biplane might be the sonic boom. (There was a story along these lines in some issue of Analog in I think the 70s.)
last I tried it (admittedly, a couple of years ago), even blizzard's torrent-based downloads were pretty slow. Extracting the torrent file and handing it to Azureus was normally vastly faster. I'm not sure what they were doing differently.
Ah, that makes sense. The "it's not really the same but it really is" approach.
snail mail, presumably
I am not allowed to quote from a book I have purchased on a street corner, because that's a "public performance".
I don't mind it supporting them. I do mind the generations who grow up with that work being around and part of the culture not being able to legally do anything with it (fanfic, mashups, whatever) until the author dies.
I don't see how that would help. "Okay, it's not the same drug. So the original formula is still free to use now that the patent applying to it has expired." All you're losing is the "new feature". Are they able to use that to keep the original drug locked up, or is it a "you gotta get the new shiney, the old and busted is crap now" situation?