Could this have implications for understanding how human physiology adapts to space?
Sure, it could. Anything could.
Humans lose muscle tone, muscle mass, vision and bone. Do you want to live a little longer as a boneless nearsighted weakling? Oh wait this is Slashdot.
I don't see how this vision ever becomes a reality in a world where putting significant computing power on my desk and fully under my control is dirt cheap. Comparatively a tablet or phone has a klunky and imprecise interface, poor processing power and needs more external support. Also the value of having a powerful processor in the box greatly speeds compute operations in many cases.
FLASH memory degrades over time, albeit slowly. If stored safely, it can store data reliably for about 10 years. I think the best bet is actually good old fashioned paper, locked in a safe deposit box or on file with a trusted attorney (or both). The attorney should certainly know about your safe deposit box at the least.
It's not the patent LAW that's the problem. They law says that a patent is for something that's innovative and that would not be obvious to a person skilled in the art (in this case, of programming computers). The problem is that this is a bad patent that should never have been granted in the first place. The problem lies with the PATENT EXAMINERS who ignored that portion of the law or were so incompetent in the field of programming that they didn't realize that passing the same data to an internet search engine that you pass to the search function on the computer or phone and then aggregating the results is obvious. The judge is supposed to presume that a patent is valid once granted. But it seems that in the area of software patents these days, that's an increasingly invalid assumption. Patents do get invalidated, but not often enough and often not before considerable damage is done to parties accused of violating patents.
I got my Facebook photo, a random pic of my dad, and a proboscis monkey as the top 3 hits. Then a map of the US, followed by a run of women. Kudos for Google getting the only online pic of me, but I'm kinda worried about a monkey being #3, lol.
But were those women all women you dated? (Or all women that your dad or the proboscis monkey dated?)
Yeah? I fail to see the difference clearly. When you carefully create circumstances that would facilitate leakage, that's so close to entrapment in my book, that it is practically the same thing.
to get foreign governments to doubt the veracity of whatever information their agents dig up
You can lie to yourself about the real purpose as much as you like, but since TFA says it is expressly a measure to catch whistleblowers, I'll call it a measure to catch whistleblowers. Also, never forget that a framework for dissemination of disinformation works just as well against your own people as it does against the foreign enemy. I'll leave you to guess avoiding whose scrutiny is more relevant to your politicians.
The TFA calls them "leakers" which is a neutral term. You're using the term "whistleblowers" which is a loaded term. What I'm reading is between the lines, admittedly. They could create traceability of information by other means without generating intentionally misleading information. Using intentionally generated disinformation rather than just identifiable information implies that the distribution of false information is a desired effect.
Note that this is an intentionally released document. The government wants you to know that it is flooding the channels with bullshit. Why would they want you to know that? They want to discourage leakers by making it clear to them that some of the information they have access to is intentionally traceable. I'm speculating that it is also because of the effect this is likely to have on the consumers of such information. The people who write these things and decide to distribute them are not idiots. They understand that what the public and foreign government perceives about what they are doing matters. They want it to be difficult not just to get secret information in the first place but also to distinguish between what's real and what's bullshit..
Technically a cult and a religion are indistinguishable. (Although major religions such as Catholicism comprise a number of cults.) People very recently began using "cult" derisively to refer to a subset of cults that use practices they particularly disapprove.
More reasonably it's really more the labor of paying lawyers and techies to go through mountains of documents, review their content and decide what is relevant. That's expensive and can't be automated.
No entrapment is when you actively encourage someone to commit a crime. Giving somebody opportunity is not the same thing. One of the purposes here is also to get foreign governments to doubt the veracity of whatever information their agents dig up. It's already suspect but if the foreign governments alsoknow the Pentagon is actively generating disinformation for them to "find" they'll be doubly doubtful.
MacControl isn't a virus. It's a Trojan and Macs are just as vulnerable as Windows PCs or Linux PCs for that matter because users can bypass any OS security.
And as a manager I hate it. I'm forced to play chicken with the other managers and try to make sure my employees get not less than whether I think they deserve. So instead of giving them the review I think they deserve I have to inflate it a little or a lot. I have to because nobody wants to evaluate one of their employees poorly unless he's doing poorly. And somebody has to get screwed if you have no poorly performing people.
Gold has value because of its many industrial uses and for decoration. There are no artificial restrictions on supply. It's just not common and therefore expensive to mine. But investors using it as a hedge have driven up the price.
That's because "Technorati" horribly mangled what the original Harvard Gazette article said which was:
Most current systems, by comparison, rely on complex and expensive equipment designed to trap a single atom or electron in a vacuum and then cool the entire system to close to absolute zero.
"Atomically pure" diamonds are of course, cheap and more readily available than synthetically grown silicon...
As I suspected, English is not your first language. When you get the grammar down, it will be easier to have a discussion without so much confusion on your part.
Jefferson DID know slavery was wrong and made many public statements to that effect and attempted on several occasions to end it in America or in Virginia.
But his reputation is forever tarnished because he did not free his own slaves whom he knew to be wrongly held in bondage.
The US Constitution requires any treaty to be ratified by the US Senate. As of now no Senate vote on ACTA has occurred so it's not law even in the USA. But the Justice Department is also insisting they will enforce it.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't want to hear any more of this BS about conservatives getting government off of peoples' backs.
These people never heard of signs?
For most typical, non-high-tech businesses, there's almost nothing that a computer can do but an iPad can't.
WORD PROCESSING.
Could this have implications for understanding how human physiology adapts to space? Sure, it could. Anything could.
Humans lose muscle tone, muscle mass, vision and bone. Do you want to live a little longer as a boneless nearsighted weakling? Oh wait this is Slashdot.
I don't see how this vision ever becomes a reality in a world where putting significant computing power on my desk and fully under my control is dirt cheap. Comparatively a tablet or phone has a klunky and imprecise interface, poor processing power and needs more external support. Also the value of having a powerful processor in the box greatly speeds compute operations in many cases.
FLASH memory degrades over time, albeit slowly. If stored safely, it can store data reliably for about 10 years. I think the best bet is actually good old fashioned paper, locked in a safe deposit box or on file with a trusted attorney (or both). The attorney should certainly know about your safe deposit box at the least.
It's not the patent LAW that's the problem. They law says that a patent is for something that's innovative and that would not be obvious to a person skilled in the art (in this case, of programming computers). The problem is that this is a bad patent that should never have been granted in the first place. The problem lies with the PATENT EXAMINERS who ignored that portion of the law or were so incompetent in the field of programming that they didn't realize that passing the same data to an internet search engine that you pass to the search function on the computer or phone and then aggregating the results is obvious. The judge is supposed to presume that a patent is valid once granted. But it seems that in the area of software patents these days, that's an increasingly invalid assumption. Patents do get invalidated, but not often enough and often not before considerable damage is done to parties accused of violating patents.
I got my Facebook photo, a random pic of my dad, and a proboscis monkey as the top 3 hits. Then a map of the US, followed by a run of women. Kudos for Google getting the only online pic of me, but I'm kinda worried about a monkey being #3, lol.
But were those women all women you dated? (Or all women that your dad or the proboscis monkey dated?)
Giving somebody opportunity is not the same thing
Yeah? I fail to see the difference clearly. When you carefully create circumstances that would facilitate leakage, that's so close to entrapment in my book, that it is practically the same thing.
to get foreign governments to doubt the veracity of whatever information their agents dig up
You can lie to yourself about the real purpose as much as you like, but since TFA says it is expressly a measure to catch whistleblowers, I'll call it a measure to catch whistleblowers. Also, never forget that a framework for dissemination of disinformation works just as well against your own people as it does against the foreign enemy. I'll leave you to guess avoiding whose scrutiny is more relevant to your politicians.
The TFA calls them "leakers" which is a neutral term. You're using the term "whistleblowers" which is a loaded term. What I'm reading is between the lines, admittedly. They could create traceability of information by other means without generating intentionally misleading information. Using intentionally generated disinformation rather than just identifiable information implies that the distribution of false information is a desired effect.
Note that this is an intentionally released document. The government wants you to know that it is flooding the channels with bullshit. Why would they want you to know that? They want to discourage leakers by making it clear to them that some of the information they have access to is intentionally traceable. I'm speculating that it is also because of the effect this is likely to have on the consumers of such information. The people who write these things and decide to distribute them are not idiots. They understand that what the public and foreign government perceives about what they are doing matters. They want it to be difficult not just to get secret information in the first place but also to distinguish between what's real and what's bullshit. .
Technically a cult and a religion are indistinguishable. (Although major religions such as Catholicism comprise a number of cults.) People very recently began using "cult" derisively to refer to a subset of cults that use practices they particularly disapprove.
As opposed to string theory...
More reasonably it's really more the labor of paying lawyers and techies to go through mountains of documents, review their content and decide what is relevant. That's expensive and can't be automated.
Of course we all have unique names and faces and Google images contains only correctly tagged photos so this won't cause any confusion at all.
What Ron and Rand Paul call freedom may not be what you call freedom. Foe example they oppose government regulations that requirenet neutrality.
No entrapment is when you actively encourage someone to commit a crime. Giving somebody opportunity is not the same thing. One of the purposes here is also to get foreign governments to doubt the veracity of whatever information their agents dig up. It's already suspect but if the foreign governments alsoknow the Pentagon is actively generating disinformation for them to "find" they'll be doubly doubtful.
MacControl isn't a virus. It's a Trojan and Macs are just as vulnerable as Windows PCs or Linux PCs for that matter because users can bypass any OS security.
And as a manager I hate it. I'm forced to play chicken with the other managers and try to make sure my employees get not less than whether I think they deserve. So instead of giving them the review I think they deserve I have to inflate it a little or a lot. I have to because nobody wants to evaluate one of their employees poorly unless he's doing poorly. And somebody has to get screwed if you have no poorly performing people.
Gold has value because of its many industrial uses and for decoration. There are no artificial restrictions on supply. It's just not common and therefore expensive to mine. But investors using it as a hedge have driven up the price.
I doubt gem quality natural diamonds are even close to the purity they require for this. Industrial diamonds even less so.
That's because "Technorati" horribly mangled what the original Harvard Gazette article said which was:
Most current systems, by comparison, rely on complex and expensive equipment designed to trap a single atom or electron in a vacuum and then cool the entire system to close to absolute zero.
"Atomically pure" diamonds are of course, cheap and more readily available than synthetically grown silicon...
As I suspected, English is not your first language. When you get the grammar down, it will be easier to have a discussion without so much confusion on your part.
Well at least if push comes to shove, we have all the protractors.
Jefferson DID know slavery was wrong and made many public statements to that effect and attempted on several occasions to end it in America or in Virginia. But his reputation is forever tarnished because he did not free his own slaves whom he knew to be wrongly held in bondage.
The US Constitution requires any treaty to be ratified by the US Senate. As of now no Senate vote on ACTA has occurred so it's not law even in the USA. But the Justice Department is also insisting they will enforce it.
How does being a lawyer excuse him from suspicion of being a complete idiot?