Lawyers do have principles. One of the most important is to represent their clients. It most likely doesn't matter to them personally all that much which side they're arguing for. Unlike us, most people don't see the right to make copies as an ideological point.
Lawyers don't make findings. They make arguments for one side, in an incredibly biased manner. Being biased is how the whole adversarial system works. There's another guy arguing against them who is employed to be incredibly biased to the other side. As such, their job when working for the MPAA was simply to put forth the argument as to why the MPAA is going to be harmed. They did that to the best of their abilities.
Their job when working for the DOJ is to put forward the argument that is in the best interests of America, and in this case, American businesses.
It sounds like the argument is consistent with the Betamax decision. This is essentially a VCR as a service rather than a product. I have no idea why it matters that storage is in RAM. There are systems that have stored data in RAM for years.
"A plurality of" is one letter longer than "More than one" and two letters longer than At Least Two", and decreases readability because it's such a bizarre word to use.
Aren't patents meant to be clear to someone skilled in the arts rather than clear to a patent attorney?
This would be a totally illogical thing for the RIAA to do.
Their purpose is to represent the interests of the record industry. Not to force DRM on everybody unless that is in the interests of the record industry. This article insists that it isn't.
This is not to say the RIAA won't do this. just that it would be illogical.
Well, it's possible that another vendor may be a subcontractor of MS and capable of getting a lower price. They may make the argument that the specific task specification is incorrect and what they want to do can be achieved with non-MS platforms.
Ex-cons: In the UK, the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act means that after a certain period of time a conviction can be considered "spent"
I'm sure that doesn't cover high ranking government jobs.
But the armed forces do have a different attitude than other professions. They're really not that concerned about your history, instead being of the opinion that they can mould anyone into shape.
Requires competence. Most non-techies aren't aware that you can encrypt disk drives. They're also not aware that the Windows Password does nothing to protect the data if the device is physically stolen. Lack of common sense isn't really a fair criticism. Lack of competence certainly is.
It certainly can. SCEE even have some sample applications that will track a face. Forget cell - you can probably do this on a PSP.
The thing about camera face detection is that "good enough" is getting it right 97% of the time. Sometimes it fails to spot the face. There's an easy workaround. If this system gets it wrong, you completely lose the 3D effect. 97% means on average you'll go wrong once every couple of seconds. In practice this will be more a case of working perfectly 9 times out of 10, and abysmally for the remainder.
It's mainly about accuracy. You can search for fleshy coloured ellipses (it's a little more complicated than this but not by as much as you might think) and the accuracy is pretty good. It's not 100% though. If a camera gets it wrong it's a minor inconvenience and you try again. If the system gets it wrong once every 100 frames there's a graphical glitch every few seconds.
So you use motion estimation. Works really nicely. But turn round and it no longer looks like a face. Move your hand in front of your face and it's possible that it will get confused.
So obviously there's a hybrid approach. Use the pure detection method and add motion estimation as a factor. It's better but getting the weightings right isn't so easy. There are probably better techniques - I will say at this point my knowledge of this sort of thing is a few years out of date - but it's not a trivial problem to solve.
Face tracking can be done on a PS3 in the space of a single frame. That's not where the problem is. Error recovery is. A fairly simply face tracking system will be able to tell you where the face is, based on known information and previous face position, but when it goes wrong it's almost impossible to detect or recover.
Slashdot Mirror
Don't think DVI supports audio. Aside from that there's not a lot of difference. They're very similar standards with some degree of compatibility.
Once you understand the concepts, switching to the other is relatively easy.
Lawyers do have principles. One of the most important is to represent their clients. It most likely doesn't matter to them personally all that much which side they're arguing for. Unlike us, most people don't see the right to make copies as an ideological point.
Lawyers don't make findings. They make arguments for one side, in an incredibly biased manner. Being biased is how the whole adversarial system works. There's another guy arguing against them who is employed to be incredibly biased to the other side. As such, their job when working for the MPAA was simply to put forth the argument as to why the MPAA is going to be harmed. They did that to the best of their abilities.
Their job when working for the DOJ is to put forward the argument that is in the best interests of America, and in this case, American businesses.
It sounds like the argument is consistent with the Betamax decision. This is essentially a VCR as a service rather than a product. I have no idea why it matters that storage is in RAM. There are systems that have stored data in RAM for years.
"A plurality of" is one letter longer than "More than one" and two letters longer than At Least Two", and decreases readability because it's such a bizarre word to use.
Aren't patents meant to be clear to someone skilled in the arts rather than clear to a patent attorney?
Patent application denied. Does not contain the word "plurality".
I have never seen the word when not used in patents (or referring to them), and I have never seen a patent without the word.
We can't get it from Amazon.co.uk because you have to have a UK billing address.
Is this even legal in the EU?
This would be a totally illogical thing for the RIAA to do.
Their purpose is to represent the interests of the record industry. Not to force DRM on everybody unless that is in the interests of the record industry. This article insists that it isn't.
This is not to say the RIAA won't do this. just that it would be illogical.
It wasn't. It started 60 trillion years ago by aliens.
Aapplying this sort of logic might seem sensible but it's not going to help or even give you useful answers.
People will only care if it stops them doing what they want to do. I suspect this isn't going to.
Actually, typically they do. Most illegal immigrants arrive legally and overstay.
I gather Merlin did. He arrived by leaving on a plane next month, and isn't leaving until 2 years ago before his visa is issued.
Well, it's possible that another vendor may be a subcontractor of MS and capable of getting a lower price. They may make the argument that the specific task specification is incorrect and what they want to do can be achieved with non-MS platforms.
Ex-cons: In the UK, the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act means that after a certain period of time a conviction can be considered "spent"
I'm sure that doesn't cover high ranking government jobs.
But the armed forces do have a different attitude than other professions. They're really not that concerned about your history, instead being of the opinion that they can mould anyone into shape.
Everyone is capable of disloyalty.
However, there's presumably no correlation between disloyalty to ones spouse and disloyalty to ones nation. Otherwise someone would have spotted it.
Requires competence. Most non-techies aren't aware that you can encrypt disk drives. They're also not aware that the Windows Password does nothing to protect the data if the device is physically stolen. Lack of common sense isn't really a fair criticism. Lack of competence certainly is.
It certainly can. SCEE even have some sample applications that will track a face. Forget cell - you can probably do this on a PSP.
The thing about camera face detection is that "good enough" is getting it right 97% of the time. Sometimes it fails to spot the face. There's an easy workaround. If this system gets it wrong, you completely lose the 3D effect. 97% means on average you'll go wrong once every couple of seconds. In practice this will be more a case of working perfectly 9 times out of 10, and abysmally for the remainder.
A non-profit organisation netting £117 million in just the first 3 months of this year,
They only make £14 million or so from that and they do have staffing costs. Not just the heavies with baseball bats either.
It's mainly about accuracy. You can search for fleshy coloured ellipses (it's a little more complicated than this but not by as much as you might think) and the accuracy is pretty good. It's not 100% though. If a camera gets it wrong it's a minor inconvenience and you try again. If the system gets it wrong once every 100 frames there's a graphical glitch every few seconds.
So you use motion estimation. Works really nicely. But turn round and it no longer looks like a face. Move your hand in front of your face and it's possible that it will get confused.
So obviously there's a hybrid approach. Use the pure detection method and add motion estimation as a factor. It's better but getting the weightings right isn't so easy. There are probably better techniques - I will say at this point my knowledge of this sort of thing is a few years out of date - but it's not a trivial problem to solve.
AFAIK, none whatsoever. This is the organisation that collects royalties for the composers and songwriters.
Face tracking can be done on a PS3 in the space of a single frame. That's not where the problem is. Error recovery is. A fairly simply face tracking system will be able to tell you where the face is, based on known information and previous face position, but when it goes wrong it's almost impossible to detect or recover.
Yes, but they must have budgeted for that. You'd have to be an idiot not to expect Apple to sue.
No. This is entirely speculation on my part, but seems a reasonable assumption given that they've extended the mp3 store to other countries.
This is a very good point. Sony squandered the moral highground a long time ago.
Do you mean Cue?