That is when i say automakers are for to conservative. Someone will find something against it. THere are litteraary dozen of inventions where you can engage the brake without the interuption where you move your foot.
And this really has been invented dozens of times, and i bet thos patents are expired by now.
And the one thing is that this innovation will not come from the racing community, because that is the rare exception that you really need brakes and accelerator together (sometimes)
I do not see any problem with cruise control... To the rest of the car this will still be a seperate brake and accelerator.
The one pedal to do braking and accelarating is already invented a dozen times. it is faster and stops this kind of error.
It is just that car owners are far to conservative to make this a succes.
It is not the traffic violation that is so important. The fact is also recorded where you were at the time of the violation. That information could me more valuable. Some terrorist originating from pakistan has no history at all and could be a false indentity. Have some minor traffic violations validates taht you exists....;)
Blaming it on a automated system is plain wrong. If you end up on the wrong end of a automated system, you find out that it might be very hard to get of some blacklist.
-Procedure to get off/ timeframe is NOT documented. (someone will look at it sometime), -The procedure to get you on the list is made by humans. Setting criteria too strict and BOOM.. -if filtering software get too strict porn people will try to fight this.: (combining a political site with some hidden porn links, ask the child porn people exactly how) -Everyone has enemies. It is easy to report someone to put a site on filter list. I bet the site owner was never notified.
1. Eat something from shop. 2. Leave shop 3. Noting left to prove you stole it.
Security waits for you to leave the shop, because it is far easier to prove that you had a shoplifting intention, but that certainly not the final rule.
Then the few serious hacks are handled by the capable PHB, Management will barely hear about it, and wonder why 2 expensive PHB and a expensive intrusion system are used. After all, what information could really be hacked.
It is not like that target have to pay the victims. The risk is not at the correct party.
It is not the act of carrying a camera that is the problem. Taking pictures is the problem. Walk into some place with a (big) camera, without asking anything will get you into trouble. In the US it will not get you into legal trouble, but you might be asked to leave/stop filming anyway.
THe difference is that they made a law about this.
Asking money for a service would be fine. The simple checkbox is not free. Dell even failed to deliver linux because of the support issues. Linux is also free.....
There are people who sell download links to popular open source software. They charge you for the service Of provinding hosting/pointing to the download.
The cost might be minimal, or might be exceptional (monthly fee of 20$ or so). That clearly is a violation of the trademark.
The mozilla/firefox trademark says you can provide a service, BUT "You must provide a prominent statement that (i) the Mozilla product is available for free and link directly to our site; (ii) the purchase, download, or acquisition of your service is separate from the download of the Mozilla product; and (iii) your service is not affiliated with Mozilla."
I cannot find firefox from dell from my current location, but I bet dell is not very clear about this that this is a service. If that was the case no issue was brought up.
They do sell "firefox installation" 17 $/pound... firefox laptop of firefox t-shirt or firefox installation.... i do not see a difference....
That might be an option.... But that processor would have to be build in into the protocol. Not some website where you would have to deposit your (BC) money, you should only risk the transaction fee.
Beside that I can think of 3 modes. -Reputation monitor, just like you check e-bay reputation or some BTC website WOT reputation. ( I bet this is feasible very simple, but it would double the transaction log. ) -3th party processer that can validate your transaction... but only risking the processing fee. -Reversible transaction. If some goods are bought that are also reversible, reversible transaction give little trouble.
You see, by using a escrow service, or someone to investigate the transaction ( tricky, since there is no interface to confirm you own a address) you are introducing a central point of authority again. Just like Mt gox. Would it not be great if the reputation of the receiver of money was maintained at the same time.
Forget the "non"anonymity of bitcoin. The problem is: every transaction becomes final. No reverse.
If i buy a apple, give a (real) coin, i expect a apple in return. If i do not get the apple, I will hold the counter party responsible. (e.g. beat him up/ call the police / etc etc.)
Now the counter party becomes the entire bitcoin public. I give a (fraction of) a bitcoin.... and I fail to get the apple. Now who do i beat up? Who do i call for? How do I tell that the reputation of the apple-seller is bad?
That is where there is no counterparty in the bitcoin protocol. bitcoin only keeps track of the bitcoin transaction, but looses track of the counter-part of the transaction.
For fiat money you can call someone (cop) to mediate the bad outcome of the transaction. For bitcoin you are lost. The coin transaction is deep down in the chain.
That is where the idea of counterparty is born, some way of 2-way commit, or reputation system for party that receives the coin transaction.
In the case of the TS, there was a report from NASA that says at page 15 that even at full power with depleted power vacuum brake assist, you can still get the car to stop by braking. And they showed it.
As for your argument of burnout, this is ussuassy done with the hand-brake, that only brake at the rear tires only.
You can get in problems with brakes if you let then run too hot, descending from a hill is a known example of this.
WIN32 Has little to do with the API that is available to windows phone 7/8. But still a interresting link if you compare that to the emulation effort of bluestacks.
MS still lacks market share, and one of their main problems is that windows phone 7 is the last platform supported by apps builders. It is that bad that they consider running android on windows.
At the same time they have to push all phone makers to pay them patent licenses for patents for fat and what they madeup when windows mobile (5.x 6.x) was the big thing.
MS Never said to be open. They controll the gates to their app store, just like Apple takes full control of everything htat is allowed to run on their phone.
Beside your point of not being able to include google apps on them, developers are tied to using a devkit that does not have a lices that allows anyone to fork it.
Forget fiat-money. Think what you need for a happy society.
Suppose you get valued by the things you do for the population, and get valued by that. Laziness wll result that you can only get very basic living. You are rich if people like your work.
Just redefine money and how it is valued, and you are one step closer.
And this situation is not hard to get to. High inflation("printing money") and/or high taxes will shrink the current capital, while at the same time you have tax income to spend on things we all have value from.
RTFA please. If the attacker illegally uses the open source that has a patent clause, or the attacker contributed to software the license can have a considerable impact.
Mistake, Nobody else has so much time to revert articles, or maintain bots to do so, to support their bias. I gave up on wikipedia a long time ago, when instead of fixing the errors i made, all my edits were reversed.
In the netherlands the police stopped sending SMS "this phone is stolen"since it looked like the IMEI code was not unique for all phones. Some phone builders messed this up.
Doesn't work. -IMEI codes can be changed by a certain kind ROM flashing in lots of phones. -Blocking is not mandatory, providers do not make it easy to block IMEI codes.
And the real culprit: This is a serious crime. Police should concentrate on getting the bad guys, track the stolen phones, put an end to the theft. Phones can be tracked and recoverd.
Of course carriers like the blocking and killswitch idea. Than they can sell phones. All stolen phones need to be replaced after all.
How about making it obligatory for carriers to track stolen phones. You must pay for the using the carriers network, so by following the money it must be possible to track the stolen phone to a new owner.
That way not only the victim can get his phone back, but also even the thief can be found. Maybe not the most economic way, but if you ever become the victim of robbery at gun/knifepoint you sure will agree that the economic cost of the phone was not the worst part.
I’m sorry to inform you that he has been taken in by unsupportable mathematics designed to prey on the gullible and the lonely. The only way this will work is if will be blackmailed with a hidden dirty sock.
Slashdot Mirror
That is when i say automakers are for to conservative. Someone will find something against it. THere are litteraary dozen of inventions where you can engage the brake without the interuption where you move your foot.
And this really has been invented dozens of times, and i bet thos patents are expired by now.
http://www.newscientist.com/da...
http://www.mobility-centres.or... (steering wheel, for people wit disability)
http://patentimages.storage.go...
http://patentimages.storage.go...
And the one thing is that this innovation will not come from the racing community, because that is the rare exception that you really need brakes and accelerator together (sometimes)
I do not see any problem with cruise control... To the rest of the car this will still be a seperate brake and accelerator.
The one pedal to do braking and accelarating is already invented a dozen times. it is faster and stops this kind of error.
It is just that car owners are far to conservative to make this a succes.
like.
http://static.autoblog.nl/imag...
It is not the traffic violation that is so important. The fact is also recorded where you were at the time of the violation. That information could me more valuable. Some terrorist originating from pakistan has no history at all and could be a false indentity. Have some minor traffic violations validates taht you exists.... ;)
Blaming it on a automated system is plain wrong. If you end up on the wrong end of a automated system, you find out that it might be very hard to get of some blacklist.
-Procedure to get off/ timeframe is NOT documented. (someone will look at it sometime),
-The procedure to get you on the list is made by humans. Setting criteria too strict and BOOM..
-if filtering software get too strict porn people will try to fight this.: (combining a political site with some hidden porn links, ask the child porn people exactly how)
-Everyone has enemies. It is easy to report someone to put a site on filter list. I bet the site owner was never notified.
I doubt it.
1. Eat something from shop.
2. Leave shop
3. Noting left to prove you stole it.
Security waits for you to leave the shop, because it is far easier to prove that you had a shoplifting intention, but that certainly not the final rule.
Then the few serious hacks are handled by the capable PHB, Management will barely hear about it, and wonder why 2 expensive PHB and a expensive intrusion system are used. After all, what information could really be hacked.
It is not like that target have to pay the victims. The risk is not at the correct party.
It is not the act of carrying a camera that is the problem. Taking pictures is the problem. Walk into some place with a (big) camera, without asking anything will get you into trouble. In the US it will not get you into legal trouble, but you might be asked to leave/stop filming anyway.
THe difference is that they made a law about this.
And coal is a common good. You can import it from an other country without consequence to the quality. Just add shipping costs.
They should include Dr evil "$100 billion dollar". Just add a bit of inflation and this superevil way of thinking is not so far off.
Asking money for a service would be fine. The simple checkbox is not free. Dell even failed to deliver linux because of the support issues. Linux is also free.....
There are people who sell download links to popular open source software. They charge you for the service Of provinding hosting/pointing to the download.
The cost might be minimal, or might be exceptional (monthly fee of 20$ or so). That clearly is a violation of the trademark.
The mozilla/firefox trademark says you can provide a service, BUT "You must provide a prominent statement that (i) the Mozilla product is available for free and link directly to our site; (ii) the purchase, download, or acquisition of your service is separate from the download of the Mozilla product; and (iii) your service is not affiliated with Mozilla."
I cannot find firefox from dell from my current location, but I bet dell is not very clear about this that this is a service. If that was the case no issue was brought up.
They do sell "firefox installation" 17 $/pound... firefox laptop of firefox t-shirt or firefox installation.... i do not see a difference....
0 Give every item a number.
1 enter the date in excel.
2 Enter the number in excel.
3 Add one other search criteria in excel
4 Sort in excell/
Leave the papers alone. If you need to find a certain date, you know what numbers to look for.
5 swear at person that threw them in the wrong order.
That might be an option.... But that processor would have to be build in into the protocol. Not some website where you would have to deposit your (BC) money, you should only risk the transaction fee.
Beside that I can think of 3 modes.
-Reputation monitor, just like you check e-bay reputation or some BTC website WOT reputation. ( I bet this is feasible very simple, but it would double the transaction log. )
-3th party processer that can validate your transaction... but only risking the processing fee.
-Reversible transaction. If some goods are bought that are also reversible, reversible transaction give little trouble.
You see, by using a escrow service, or someone to investigate the transaction ( tricky, since there is no interface to confirm you own a address) you are introducing a central point of authority again. Just like Mt gox. Would it not be great if the reputation of the receiver of money was maintained at the same time.
Forget the "non"anonymity of bitcoin. The problem is: every transaction becomes final. No reverse.
If i buy a apple, give a (real) coin, i expect a apple in return. If i do not get the apple, I will hold the counter party responsible. (e.g. beat him up/ call the police / etc etc.)
Now the counter party becomes the entire bitcoin public. I give a (fraction of) a bitcoin.... and I fail to get the apple. Now who do i beat up? Who do i call for? How do I tell that the reputation of the apple-seller is bad?
That is where there is no counterparty in the bitcoin protocol. bitcoin only keeps track of the bitcoin transaction, but looses track of the counter-part of the transaction.
For fiat money you can call someone (cop) to mediate the bad outcome of the transaction. For bitcoin you are lost. The coin transaction is deep down in the chain.
That is where the idea of counterparty is born, some way of 2-way commit, or reputation system for party that receives the coin transaction.
In the case of the TS, there was a report from NASA that says at page 15 that even at full power with depleted power vacuum brake assist, you can still get the car to stop by braking. And they showed it.
As for your argument of burnout, this is ussuassy done with the hand-brake, that only brake at the rear tires only.
You can get in problems with brakes if you let then run too hot, descending from a hill is a known example of this.
WIN32 Has little to do with the API that is available to windows phone 7/8. But still a interresting link if you compare that to the emulation effort of bluestacks.
MS still lacks market share, and one of their main problems is that windows phone 7 is the last platform supported by apps builders. It is that bad that they consider running android on windows.
At the same time they have to push all phone makers to pay them patent licenses for patents for fat and what they madeup when windows mobile (5.x 6.x) was the big thing.
MS Never said to be open. They controll the gates to their app store, just like Apple takes full control of everything htat is allowed to run on their phone.
Beside your point of not being able to include google apps on them, developers are tied to using a devkit that does not have a lices that allows anyone to fork it.
Forget fiat-money. Think what you need for a happy society.
Suppose you get valued by the things you do for the population, and get valued by that. Laziness wll result that you can only get very basic living. You are rich if people like your work.
Just redefine money and how it is valued, and you are one step closer.
And this situation is not hard to get to. High inflation("printing money") and/or high taxes will shrink the current capital, while at the same time you have tax income to spend on things we all have value from.
RTFA please. If the attacker illegally uses the open source that has a patent clause, or the attacker contributed to software the license can have a considerable impact.
Mistake, Nobody else has so much time to revert articles, or maintain bots to do so, to support their bias. I gave up on wikipedia a long time ago, when instead of fixing the errors i made, all my edits were reversed.
In the netherlands the police stopped sending SMS "this phone is stolen"since it looked like the IMEI code was not unique for all phones. Some phone builders messed this up.
Doesn't work.
-IMEI codes can be changed by a certain kind ROM flashing in lots of phones.
-Blocking is not mandatory, providers do not make it easy to block IMEI codes.
And the real culprit: This is a serious crime. Police should concentrate on getting the bad guys, track the stolen phones, put an end to the theft. Phones can be tracked and recoverd.
Of course carriers like the blocking and killswitch idea. Than they can sell phones. All stolen phones need to be replaced after all.
How about making it obligatory for carriers to track stolen phones. You must pay for the using the carriers network, so by following the money it must be possible to track the stolen phone to a new owner.
That way not only the victim can get his phone back, but also even the thief can be found. Maybe not the most economic way, but if you ever become the victim of robbery at gun/knifepoint you sure will agree that the economic cost of the phone was not the worst part.
Instead of one target to attack (the target website), there are now 2 targets to attack: the shapeshifter obfuscation box and the target website.
I’m sorry to inform you that he has been taken in by unsupportable mathematics designed to prey on the gullible and the lonely. The only way this will work is if will be blackmailed with a hidden dirty sock.
Maybe some chinese guy had his last day on the job, have a long newyear holiday , and Start a new job after the new year holiday.