I think if you are using a CRT monitor (anyone still doing that?), green on black would be best from a radiation (not the mutant-producing kind but probably also not very good) perspective, since black is nothing being emitted and green, due to our eyes being most sensitive to it, shows up as brighter per unit of radiation, allowing you to turn down the brightness and get the same effect as another color at full contrast.
I have to think tracking/throttling the rate per IP has to be already done by ISPs where bandwidth is a problem. Otherwise all the P2P sessions as well as UDP traffic (which doesn't have congestion control and so doesn't respond to a loss by reducing its rate) would clobber most TCP sessions. Fixing TCP will just lead people to use UDP. Skype, worms, and P2P applications already exploit UDP for exactly this reason. So, cut straight to the chase, don't bother with making TCP fairer or whatever, just do per-IP rate control at the ISP level.
It isn't clear why this needs to be done in the core routers at all instead of just at the endpoints, if the goal is to make P2P traffic more manageable. P2P using so many flows (and different routes) will probably just get around any core-based solution anyway.
Also "loss unfairness" is already solved by ECN, but ECN (which is implemented) isn't really used as much as it should/could be, because some routers drop your packets if you use it (I believe either chase.com or chaseonline.com still does this?), and nobody really cares. Why add something else to the client stacks that nobody will end up using either? That is basically why this hasn't been implemented.
Now, here's a better alternative -- permit carry-ons, but have the crew do a curb-side check-in of the bags (i.e. they take all the big bags from you before you board the plane). They already do this for short "commuter" type flights. Some of these planes' carry on compartments are too small to fit everybody's carry on, or bigger things like a car seat or stroller (which you REALLY don't want to get put on the wrong flight). So you leave them in the middle of the jetway with a tag on them and the baggage crew puts them directly from there into the cargo hold of the plane.
If airlines did that on all flights, people would be more willing to part with their unnecessary carry on stuff since there's a much lower chance of the stuff getting misplaced.
There are at least people working on the problem, if its any consolation. When I interned at PennDOT, there were a couple guys with huge monitors (like 50"), and ALL they did ALL DAY LONG was look at satellite photos overlaid with the current GPS-based street drawings, and any place the two didn't match up, they moved the street to match the photos. They do this just as a service to us citizens and most maps you can buy directly in some format (probably not one you can use on your GPS device) or are free. The GPS device makers have to put the updated info in their maps, which takes longer.
What's more frustrating to me is that my street is a "Curve", not a "Street", "Lane" or some other common type. But, Google (and most others) insists that it is a "Crve" (while the official USPS abbreviation of "Curve" is "Curv"), so I have to tell people this otherwise my house doesn't exist at all.
The typical user does not install the *Windows* OS. The typical user buys a computer with Windows pre-loaded, and must install linux OS themselves. If >90% of desktops/laptops come with linux pre-installed, then these type of problems are not important. Right now, they are.
I can't see how the responses should be the same, because they are completely different.
In my first sentence of my original post I said "more or less mimic" meaning "take ideas from" or "use as a starting point", not "directly copy every aspect of their design without changing anything". The point of the sentence YOU quoted was to restrict this suggestion to non-popular websites. I.e. if you are designing dell.com and you mimic the design of apple.com you might run into some issues with brand dilution or some other random law.
Except that a GPL violation isn't just being a jerk, it is an illegal copyright violation. So stop comparing the two. Patent trolling is intentionally inflicting monetary pain on someone else, which is not what I'm suggesting either, so stop comparing the two.
My point is that the design of EVERYTHING is based on or mimics the design of one or more other things. It happens to everyone. Either write your congressman and get it outlawed, or deal with it.
I'm not even suggesting copying some other website so closely you can tell one was copied from the other. I'm suggesting, you already have a website that needs to look nicer, borrow some ideas from other websites. You can take a color scheme from one, ideas for extra little graphics from another, etc. The point is, if you're not a graphic designer, and want a website that looks like it was designed by a professional, then copy enough things that WERE done by professionals so that it looks good but you didn't have to hire anyone.
Who said anything about doing that? I think you made that up in your head or are just angry that someone has done what you described (not what I described) to you.
BTW, I did check the pirated-sites.com link, and I only found 1 example of the first 10 or so that I looked at where someone had actually copied someone else's html/css/flash code for their site. The rest were people whining about someone else using a black/white/pink color scheme, or complaining about people copying the content off their website (which is COMPLETELY different).
First off, I'm not suggesting exact copying. I'm suggesting mimicking. Which I think is completely different from what you're accusing it of being (copyright violation)
REAL translation #1: LG's Voyager phone mimicking the iPhone REAL translation #2: Openoffice's UI mimicking Microsoft Office REAL translation #3: An artist recording & selling a song that is based on some song Y by another artist. REAL translation #4: KDE/Gnome/etc. mimicking Windows UI, Gimp mimicking photoshop, and an incredibly long list of other open source programs mimicking very closely their non-free counterparts.
So my website has completely different HTML/CSS code (written without looking at your code), but looks quite similar to yours. How is this any different from anything else? If I'm not copying your logo, or trying to use your brand recognition to my benefit, or copying something which I am legally not allowed to copy, then TOO BAD.
In none of the cases I listed above does anyone have to pay anybody for use, nor are they breaking any laws.
You can't copyright a color scheme or a layout or whatever. Even if you wanted to, there are other people who have done it already, so whatever website I use for my inspiration has no doubt been inspired by someone else, so I'm not doing anything different than they did.
If you can't come up with a pretty design (I can't either), then more or less mimic someone else's design. If you mimic some non-popular website's look, and your website also isn't that popular, nobody will notice or care (not that you can get in trouble for this as far as I know). Or, hire a graphic designer at a small or one-man firm to create a mockup in photoshop of your new website design. This takes someone who is skilled in graphic design like an hour or so and shouldn't cost more than $50-100. You then write the html/css to actually implement their scheme, which isn't hard because you are basically just following their directions.
you didn't search thepiratebay.org before posting right? The supposed RTM of SP1 has been up for a few days, at least that's what I've heard... The question is whether it is legit, and more importantly, whether if its not the RTM version, will it successfully uninstall so the real RTM can be installed without reinstalling Vista. That's the real question.
I think my actual first was PacMac on an old TI cartridge-based computer system you plugged into the TV (can't remember the model number), then space invaders and some game involving the Kool-aid guy on Atari.
But, the two earliest games I played the most were definitely Wolfenstein 3D and Tank Wars. Our home PC at the time did not have enough RAM to be able to run Wolfenstein 3D and have both the mouse driver and the sound card driver loaded in memory. So, I sadly had to play it without sound.
Finally, you'd need a viable dinosaur egg. You can't just pick someone else's egg and stick dino DNA in it, eggs are highly specialized. You might get away with something as similar as elephant-mammoth but there just isn't anything *like* a dinosaur, nothing *near* close enough for a viable egg.
You gave me images of a mammoth hatching out of a very large elephant egg, followed by an elephant birthing a velociraptor. I'll grant you that eggs are specialized, but I think you should be more careful with your use of the word "egg".
Or a accelerometer manufacturer looking for a client...
If only ALL PHONES already had some way to accept input... Hmm... How about you hold both phones up to your mouth and whisper some random words into them at the same time? To encourage people from not all saying "12345", one phone could even display a random sequence of numbers that you then speak into the phones. It doesn't matter if you say the right numbers, since both phones are going off what they hear.
With the shaking method, someone can either watch you and try to shake theirs at the same time, or record a video of it and figure out what the acceleration values should be. With speaking, the attacker would have to get the sounds right, plus get the volume right, plus get the background noise & relative timing right (which is going to be slightly off unless the attacker is RIGHT next to you). Better yet, both phone owners could speak the sequence standing slightly apart, so nobody else will hear person #1, person #2, and the background noise with the same timings.
Re:The Rules of the Swarm... on slashdot.
on
The Rules of the Swarm
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
I can't speak for him directly, but I've been to one of his talks and read a bunch of his papers. Basically, the 3 rules for bird/fish/etc movement are very simple and are surprisingly robust. But, it is extremely difficult to reverse-engineer the rules. Sure, those 3 rules are simple enough, but are they the ones actually used by the animals? You can't exactly ask them. And then there are questions about whether an individual gives more weight to a neighboring individual which it can only hear and not see (because it is behind them), or to what extent an individual's own sense of direction and instincts plays a part. Animals have tons of senses, each with tons of dimensions.
Then there are behaviors like in geese where if one goose in a migrating flock is injured/sick/tired/dying, another goose will leave the flock (the rest of which continues on) and this other goose waits until the first goose is better (or dies) and then they continue the migration. What is the rule for that? It is just as hard to fine-tune a given set of rules except via experiment/simulation since there's not much mathematical theory behind this yet (though I believe he's got some started).
Then there are things like, we'd like to make robot swarms and we want them to act like birds except do X instead of Y. Even if the natural behaviors are modeled it is very difficult to figure out what rules to add/change/delete to get the desired change. Or, we want the robots to do natural thing X, but we need some guarantee that they will do it with some level of accuracy and we need a kill switch in case they become self-aware. This field is wide open and is extremely interesting, because even if we're not explicitly mimicking natural phenomenon we are anyway when we have groups of things (computerized or otherwise) that have many individual components with complex and somewhat autonomous interactions.
At business park where the startup I used to work at was located, there was a guy going around swiping all kinds of stuff using the "look like you belong" tactic. He walked into our place in a fancy suit talking on a cell phone by following an employee thru the door. A few of us, not knowing about the other thefts but standing there in shorts & t-shirts, looked at each other like "who the heck is this guy?". A few of the biggest/scariest guys in the office helped him to the door after he mumbled something about being there to see some generic person and headed toward the sys admin corner of the office...
Too bad the owners never let anyone important enough to be wearing a suit anywhere NEAR there, and if someone important was coming we had a pre-announced "business casual day" just in case they wanted a quick tour. I think the only reason he wasn't tackled to the ground on the spot is because nobody knew about the other thefts at the time.
and considering how nintendo added USB keyboard support with a simple update, I don't see why nintendo is behind except that they've not added USB hdd support yet because they don't need it yet.
no sarcasm in this post, don't want you to miss it again.:)
Nintendo's obviously going to have to figure something out here, as the industry is obviously moving to downloads for the exact reasons you mention. For example, they should include a USB port so that you can attach a USB hard drive to store your games?
Slashdot Mirror
As opposed to the white pixels which are leaving the light as light, which then hits something else and is converted to heat?
So, based on your medical expertise, you are saying if it hurts when I do X, I shouldn't do X?
All those white pixels and F's waste energy! How about #CCCC00 on #CCCCCC, or #333300 on #333333?
I think if you are using a CRT monitor (anyone still doing that?), green on black would be best from a radiation (not the mutant-producing kind but probably also not very good) perspective, since black is nothing being emitted and green, due to our eyes being most sensitive to it, shows up as brighter per unit of radiation, allowing you to turn down the brightness and get the same effect as another color at full contrast.
What kind of wireless networks do you work with? I do a lot of multihop wireless stuff and would be interested to know more details on this.
I have to think tracking/throttling the rate per IP has to be already done by ISPs where bandwidth is a problem. Otherwise all the P2P sessions as well as UDP traffic (which doesn't have congestion control and so doesn't respond to a loss by reducing its rate) would clobber most TCP sessions. Fixing TCP will just lead people to use UDP. Skype, worms, and P2P applications already exploit UDP for exactly this reason. So, cut straight to the chase, don't bother with making TCP fairer or whatever, just do per-IP rate control at the ISP level.
It isn't clear why this needs to be done in the core routers at all instead of just at the endpoints, if the goal is to make P2P traffic more manageable. P2P using so many flows (and different routes) will probably just get around any core-based solution anyway.
Also "loss unfairness" is already solved by ECN, but ECN (which is implemented) isn't really used as much as it should/could be, because some routers drop your packets if you use it (I believe either chase.com or chaseonline.com still does this?), and nobody really cares. Why add something else to the client stacks that nobody will end up using either? That is basically why this hasn't been implemented.
Actually, some Model T's could run on ethanol so farmers could make fuel themselves.
If airlines did that on all flights, people would be more willing to part with their unnecessary carry on stuff since there's a much lower chance of the stuff getting misplaced.
There are at least people working on the problem, if its any consolation. When I interned at PennDOT, there were a couple guys with huge monitors (like 50"), and ALL they did ALL DAY LONG was look at satellite photos overlaid with the current GPS-based street drawings, and any place the two didn't match up, they moved the street to match the photos. They do this just as a service to us citizens and most maps you can buy directly in some format (probably not one you can use on your GPS device) or are free. The GPS device makers have to put the updated info in their maps, which takes longer.
What's more frustrating to me is that my street is a "Curve", not a "Street", "Lane" or some other common type. But, Google (and most others) insists that it is a "Crve" (while the official USPS abbreviation of "Curve" is "Curv"), so I have to tell people this otherwise my house doesn't exist at all.
The typical user does not install the *Windows* OS. The typical user buys a computer with Windows pre-loaded, and must install linux OS themselves. If >90% of desktops/laptops come with linux pre-installed, then these type of problems are not important. Right now, they are.
I can't see how the responses should be the same, because they are completely different.
In my first sentence of my original post I said "more or less mimic" meaning "take ideas from" or "use as a starting point", not "directly copy every aspect of their design without changing anything". The point of the sentence YOU quoted was to restrict this suggestion to non-popular websites. I.e. if you are designing dell.com and you mimic the design of apple.com you might run into some issues with brand dilution or some other random law.
Except that a GPL violation isn't just being a jerk, it is an illegal copyright violation. So stop comparing the two. Patent trolling is intentionally inflicting monetary pain on someone else, which is not what I'm suggesting either, so stop comparing the two.
My point is that the design of EVERYTHING is based on or mimics the design of one or more other things. It happens to everyone. Either write your congressman and get it outlawed, or deal with it.
I'm not even suggesting copying some other website so closely you can tell one was copied from the other. I'm suggesting, you already have a website that needs to look nicer, borrow some ideas from other websites. You can take a color scheme from one, ideas for extra little graphics from another, etc. The point is, if you're not a graphic designer, and want a website that looks like it was designed by a professional, then copy enough things that WERE done by professionals so that it looks good but you didn't have to hire anyone.
Who said anything about doing that? I think you made that up in your head or are just angry that someone has done what you described (not what I described) to you.
BTW, I did check the pirated-sites.com link, and I only found 1 example of the first 10 or so that I looked at where someone had actually copied someone else's html/css/flash code for their site. The rest were people whining about someone else using a black/white/pink color scheme, or complaining about people copying the content off their website (which is COMPLETELY different).
thank you for helping set him straight
First off, I'm not suggesting exact copying. I'm suggesting mimicking. Which I think is completely different from what you're accusing it of being (copyright violation)
REAL translation #1: LG's Voyager phone mimicking the iPhone
REAL translation #2: Openoffice's UI mimicking Microsoft Office
REAL translation #3: An artist recording & selling a song that is based on some song Y by another artist.
REAL translation #4: KDE/Gnome/etc. mimicking Windows UI, Gimp mimicking photoshop, and an incredibly long list of other open source programs mimicking very closely their non-free counterparts.
So my website has completely different HTML/CSS code (written without looking at your code), but looks quite similar to yours. How is this any different from anything else? If I'm not copying your logo, or trying to use your brand recognition to my benefit, or copying something which I am legally not allowed to copy, then TOO BAD.
In none of the cases I listed above does anyone have to pay anybody for use, nor are they breaking any laws.
You can't copyright a color scheme or a layout or whatever. Even if you wanted to, there are other people who have done it already, so whatever website I use for my inspiration has no doubt been inspired by someone else, so I'm not doing anything different than they did.
If you can't come up with a pretty design (I can't either), then more or less mimic someone else's design. If you mimic some non-popular website's look, and your website also isn't that popular, nobody will notice or care (not that you can get in trouble for this as far as I know). Or, hire a graphic designer at a small or one-man firm to create a mockup in photoshop of your new website design. This takes someone who is skilled in graphic design like an hour or so and shouldn't cost more than $50-100. You then write the html/css to actually implement their scheme, which isn't hard because you are basically just following their directions.
and the link on microsoft.com is where?
you didn't search thepiratebay.org before posting right? The supposed RTM of SP1 has been up for a few days, at least that's what I've heard... The question is whether it is legit, and more importantly, whether if its not the RTM version, will it successfully uninstall so the real RTM can be installed without reinstalling Vista. That's the real question.
I think my actual first was PacMac on an old TI cartridge-based computer system you plugged into the TV (can't remember the model number), then space invaders and some game involving the Kool-aid guy on Atari.
But, the two earliest games I played the most were definitely Wolfenstein 3D and Tank Wars. Our home PC at the time did not have enough RAM to be able to run Wolfenstein 3D and have both the mouse driver and the sound card driver loaded in memory. So, I sadly had to play it without sound.
I will not admit to anything involving a d20.
You gave me images of a mammoth hatching out of a very large elephant egg, followed by an elephant birthing a velociraptor. I'll grant you that eggs are specialized, but I think you should be more careful with your use of the word "egg".
Or a accelerometer manufacturer looking for a client...
If only ALL PHONES already had some way to accept input... Hmm... How about you hold both phones up to your mouth and whisper some random words into them at the same time? To encourage people from not all saying "12345", one phone could even display a random sequence of numbers that you then speak into the phones. It doesn't matter if you say the right numbers, since both phones are going off what they hear.
With the shaking method, someone can either watch you and try to shake theirs at the same time, or record a video of it and figure out what the acceleration values should be. With speaking, the attacker would have to get the sounds right, plus get the volume right, plus get the background noise & relative timing right (which is going to be slightly off unless the attacker is RIGHT next to you). Better yet, both phone owners could speak the sequence standing slightly apart, so nobody else will hear person #1, person #2, and the background noise with the same timings.
I can't speak for him directly, but I've been to one of his talks and read a bunch of his papers. Basically, the 3 rules for bird/fish/etc movement are very simple and are surprisingly robust. But, it is extremely difficult to reverse-engineer the rules. Sure, those 3 rules are simple enough, but are they the ones actually used by the animals? You can't exactly ask them. And then there are questions about whether an individual gives more weight to a neighboring individual which it can only hear and not see (because it is behind them), or to what extent an individual's own sense of direction and instincts plays a part. Animals have tons of senses, each with tons of dimensions.
Then there are behaviors like in geese where if one goose in a migrating flock is injured/sick/tired/dying, another goose will leave the flock (the rest of which continues on) and this other goose waits until the first goose is better (or dies) and then they continue the migration. What is the rule for that? It is just as hard to fine-tune a given set of rules except via experiment/simulation since there's not much mathematical theory behind this yet (though I believe he's got some started).
Then there are things like, we'd like to make robot swarms and we want them to act like birds except do X instead of Y. Even if the natural behaviors are modeled it is very difficult to figure out what rules to add/change/delete to get the desired change. Or, we want the robots to do natural thing X, but we need some guarantee that they will do it with some level of accuracy and we need a kill switch in case they become self-aware. This field is wide open and is extremely interesting, because even if we're not explicitly mimicking natural phenomenon we are anyway when we have groups of things (computerized or otherwise) that have many individual components with complex and somewhat autonomous interactions.
At business park where the startup I used to work at was located, there was a guy going around swiping all kinds of stuff using the "look like you belong" tactic. He walked into our place in a fancy suit talking on a cell phone by following an employee thru the door. A few of us, not knowing about the other thefts but standing there in shorts & t-shirts, looked at each other like "who the heck is this guy?". A few of the biggest/scariest guys in the office helped him to the door after he mumbled something about being there to see some generic person and headed toward the sys admin corner of the office...
Too bad the owners never let anyone important enough to be wearing a suit anywhere NEAR there, and if someone important was coming we had a pre-announced "business casual day" just in case they wanted a quick tour. I think the only reason he wasn't tackled to the ground on the spot is because nobody knew about the other thefts at the time.
and considering how nintendo added USB keyboard support with a simple update, I don't see why nintendo is behind except that they've not added USB hdd support yet because they don't need it yet.
:)
no sarcasm in this post, don't want you to miss it again.