In Texas, and probably other states, there are laws restricting reading the magnetic data off a driver's license. http://www.legis.state.tx.us/tlodocs/78R/billtext/html/SB01445F.htm
I'm pretty sure Best Buy is not a law enforcement officer, nor selling alcohol, so that leaves a restricted set of exemptions for financial institutions which seems like a long shot.
I am not a lawyer, etc, etc. That's a bill, not a law, but I think something extremely similar is on the books.
While I am not the biggest fan of it's proprietary nature or bugginess, flash has one big feature that makes developing for it a LOT better than html5: ActionsScript 3. It's based on what ecmascript 4 would have been, and is a true strongly typed class-based object oriented language with first-class functions. It's a really nice language to develop in, actually. Especially compared to javascript. Fuck javascript. Fuck it right in its almost-untyped, prototype-based ass. And I say that as someone that develops in javascript every day.
Although I program in and use Flash daily, actual flash support was not a dealbreaker when I chose to get an android phone. It was important, sure, but not a dealbreaker. The dealbreaker was WHY flash isn't supported on apple products. It's clearly not a technical limitation since it can be installed on a jailbroken ipad and works well even through a compatibility layer http://www.engadget.com/2010/07/07/how-to-install-flash-on-your-jailbroken-ipad-for-real/. It's entirely political. I don't want to be told what I'm allowed to install or not. My devices are MY devices.
Here you go: http://code.google.com/p/android-scripting/
"Scripts can be run interactively in a terminal, in the background, or via Locale. Python, Perl, JRuby, Lua, BeanShell, JavaScript, Tcl, and shell are currently supported"
Re:You signed away this "right" by picking Apple.
on
Flash Is Not a Right
·
· Score: 1
The development tools for flash can actually be completely free of cost.
I will agree that the capabilities are neutered compared to native tools, but when compared to html5/javascript Flash has much better capabilities. Things like a proper object oriented and class based language to develop in, which is actually compiled rather than interpreted, and has a real type system. Things like webcam and microphone access, as well as binary sockets.
The only real reason I want flash to stick around is because javascript programming is ****ing painful. Cross-browser issues aside, the language just isn't very good for large projects. There's no real type system, everything is dynamic, the prototype inheritance model is clumsy, and there's no compile-time error checking because there's no compilation.
I would love to have a real open standard to use to program client-side stuff for the web, but html5/javascript is a huge step backwards from what is currently available with AS3. If microsoft hadn't sabotaged all the good parts of javascript 2, we'd all have an awesome, free, standard, and open client side development platform. As of now, we only have a mediocre, free, standard, and open platform.
I encourage people to learn Haxe. http://haxe.org It can compile to javascript, flash, as well as server-side languages and runtimes, and it's got all the features I really want.
According to the list of supported swf tags (http://wiki.github.com/tobeytailor/gordon/swf-tag-support-table ), it does not support DoABC, which means that it does not support Actionscript3. So basically, it only supports the parts of flash that really annoy people: Animations. This won't let you play many neat flash games, or replace Flex, or play a movie designed for Flash9 (introduced in 2006) or later.
As an Actionscript hobbyist, I love the idea of an open source implementation of the player. But so far, none of the open source alternatives support the features I actually like: Actionscript3. It's a strongly typed language with real classes, and it's compiled to bytecode rather than interpreted (mostly). Javascript has come a long way, but it still sucks if you like strongly typed variables.
Keep trying, Tobias. And if you get that byte-level access, let the world know.
I built a utility that can be used for the same purpose back in april. http://cosmodro.me/blog/2009/apr/11/smuggle-improved/ It's a small flash movie that can encode files into pngs and decode them back. It's not limited to torrents, so you can encode any file that's less than about 16MB.
The Stargate movie came out in 1994 according to IMDB, yet in the first 100 domain names I find: stargate.com pyramid.com vortex.com portal.com rosetta.com
If you you think they should shave down that margin, well then I hope you choose which restaurants you eat at based on their gross margins, too, otherwise you're being pretty arbitrary.
I cook my own (damn good) food because restaurants are too expensive for approximately the same product. I suppose if I cared about ambiance or the social scene involved that might be an intangible in favor of a restaurant. But I don't.
superconductors: MRI and SQUID (superconducting quantum interference) medical imaging.
nanotech: buckyballs - best lubricant out there, being composed of billions of nanoscopic ball shaped molecules. Potentially superstrong carbon structures, drug delivery systems, etc. nanotech is still in its infancy.
holograms: used to protect currency all over the world from forgery.
Re:How would you expect it to work?
on
Helpful Handicap
·
· Score: 1
This is true, but you also get to jettison the weights backwards once you've launched, adding even more momentum to your jump. I think that's the part that most people don't get.
Oh wow. I've already got a computer in my car ( home.austin.rr.com/sshipman/lorelei ), but those laser windshield robots sound like a pretty good idea.:)
My next addition was going to be wireless networking, but I may have to rethink.
My company is working with some Transmeta products. And I can tell you from our own benchmarks that there is a huge improvement between first run and third run. Even discounting cache.
When I was at Rice (last year), he called himself "Dick". This is, of course, very funny the first few times you hear it, especially if you are an easily amused undergrad. As I was.
You need an organ. To ensure maximum biocomapatibility, it may prove advantageous to produce a clone from which the organs will be harvested. Since the clone will be discarded after harvesting, should measures be taken to ensure that the clone will not develop a brain?
To this I answer a resounding "YES!, of course!" I really don't see how that situation could possibly be an "ethical minefield". A human body that has never developed a brain cannot possibly be a person, so who is there to worry about?
That's exactly the situation I keep trying to bring up to defend cloning technology when someone brings up their fears about growing people solely for organs.
Of course if it's possible to grow donor bodies without brains that will be done. And if it's not possible, then I seriously doubt that clones will have any fewer rights than natural born people.
Why go worrying about supposed special cases when the general case (you can't just take an organ from someone) covers it?
It's expensive now because they have to use scanning tunnelling microscopes to manipulate the molecules.
But once they build a few nanomachines in this expensive way, they can use those machines to build more machines really really cheaply for just the cost of materials (graphite isn't expensive at all).
So in the end, it's going to be super-small AND super-cheap.
Slashdot Mirror
In Texas, and probably other states, there are laws restricting reading the magnetic data off a driver's license. http://www.legis.state.tx.us/tlodocs/78R/billtext/html/SB01445F.htm
I'm pretty sure Best Buy is not a law enforcement officer, nor selling alcohol, so that leaves a restricted set of exemptions for financial institutions which seems like a long shot.
I am not a lawyer, etc, etc. That's a bill, not a law, but I think something extremely similar is on the books.
While I am not the biggest fan of it's proprietary nature or bugginess, flash has one big feature that makes developing for it a LOT better than html5: ActionsScript 3. It's based on what ecmascript 4 would have been, and is a true strongly typed class-based object oriented language with first-class functions. It's a really nice language to develop in, actually. Especially compared to javascript. Fuck javascript. Fuck it right in its almost-untyped, prototype-based ass. And I say that as someone that develops in javascript every day.
Although I program in and use Flash daily, actual flash support was not a dealbreaker when I chose to get an android phone. It was important, sure, but not a dealbreaker. The dealbreaker was WHY flash isn't supported on apple products. It's clearly not a technical limitation since it can be installed on a jailbroken ipad and works well even through a compatibility layer http://www.engadget.com/2010/07/07/how-to-install-flash-on-your-jailbroken-ipad-for-real/. It's entirely political. I don't want to be told what I'm allowed to install or not. My devices are MY devices.
Here you go:
http://code.google.com/p/android-scripting/
"Scripts can be run interactively in a terminal, in the background, or via Locale. Python, Perl, JRuby, Lua, BeanShell, JavaScript, Tcl, and shell are currently supported"
The development tools for flash can actually be completely free of cost.
http://opensource.adobe.com/wiki/display/flexsdk/Download+Flex+4
http://www.flashdevelop.org
I will agree that the capabilities are neutered compared to native tools, but when compared to html5/javascript Flash has much better capabilities. Things like a proper object oriented and class based language to develop in, which is actually compiled rather than interpreted, and has a real type system. Things like webcam and microphone access, as well as binary sockets.
The only real reason I want flash to stick around is because javascript programming is ****ing painful. Cross-browser issues aside, the language just isn't very good for large projects. There's no real type system, everything is dynamic, the prototype inheritance model is clumsy, and there's no compile-time error checking because there's no compilation.
I would love to have a real open standard to use to program client-side stuff for the web, but html5/javascript is a huge step backwards from what is currently available with AS3. If microsoft hadn't sabotaged all the good parts of javascript 2, we'd all have an awesome, free, standard, and open client side development platform. As of now, we only have a mediocre, free, standard, and open platform.
I encourage people to learn Haxe. http://haxe.org It can compile to javascript, flash, as well as server-side languages and runtimes, and it's got all the features I really want.
According to the list of supported swf tags (http://wiki.github.com/tobeytailor/gordon/swf-tag-support-table ), it does not support DoABC, which means that it does not support Actionscript3. So basically, it only supports the parts of flash that really annoy people: Animations. This won't let you play many neat flash games, or replace Flex, or play a movie designed for Flash9 (introduced in 2006) or later.
As an Actionscript hobbyist, I love the idea of an open source implementation of the player. But so far, none of the open source alternatives support the features I actually like: Actionscript3. It's a strongly typed language with real classes, and it's compiled to bytecode rather than interpreted (mostly). Javascript has come a long way, but it still sucks if you like strongly typed variables.
Keep trying, Tobias. And if you get that byte-level access, let the world know.
I built a utility that can be used for the same purpose back in april. http://cosmodro.me/blog/2009/apr/11/smuggle-improved/
It's a small flash movie that can encode files into pngs and decode them back. It's not limited to torrents, so you can encode any file that's less than about 16MB.
The Stargate movie came out in 1994 according to IMDB, yet in the first 100 domain names I find:
stargate.com
pyramid.com
vortex.com
portal.com
rosetta.com
Neat.
I cook my own (damn good) food because restaurants are too expensive for approximately the same product. I suppose if I cared about ambiance or the social scene involved that might be an intangible in favor of a restaurant. But I don't.
Which Tyler, I presume?
A couple of arms and a red tongue...
superconductors: MRI and SQUID (superconducting quantum interference) medical imaging.
nanotech: buckyballs - best lubricant out there, being composed of billions of nanoscopic ball shaped molecules. Potentially superstrong carbon structures, drug delivery systems, etc. nanotech is still in its infancy.
holograms: used to protect currency all over the world from forgery.
This is true, but you also get to jettison the weights backwards once you've launched, adding even more momentum to your jump. I think that's the part that most people don't get.
Oh wow. I've already got a computer in my car ( home.austin.rr.com/sshipman/lorelei ), but those laser windshield robots sound like a pretty good idea. :)
My next addition was going to be wireless networking, but I may have to rethink.
Would this be the Terrible Secret of Space?
They needed a helicopter to lift these things onto the truck, yet cite "theft" as a possible danger to the fossils.
I just found that funny.
Actually, in the versions of the story I've heard, it was Dick Smalley who had the epiphany of the soccerball shape, rather than Kroto.
Of course, I heard the stories when I was at Rice, and Smalley is generally regarded as a self-important jerk. Make of that what you will.
My company is working with some Transmeta products. And I can tell you from our own benchmarks that there is a huge improvement between first run and third run. Even discounting cache.
You have a 20 MEGA hertz vibrator?
When I was at Rice (last year), he called himself "Dick". This is, of course, very funny the first few times you hear it, especially if you are an easily amused undergrad. As I was.
To this I answer a resounding "YES!, of course!" I really don't see how that situation could possibly be an "ethical minefield". A human body that has never developed a brain cannot possibly be a person, so who is there to worry about?
That's exactly the situation I keep trying to bring up to defend cloning technology when someone brings up their fears about growing people solely for organs.
Of course if it's possible to grow donor bodies without brains that will be done. And if it's not possible, then I seriously doubt that clones will have any fewer rights than natural born people.
Why go worrying about supposed special cases when the general case (you can't just take an organ from someone) covers it?
You misspelled "Browne" There's an "e" on the end.
(Just trying to be funny).
yeah. I work with a couple of them every day. You'll probably be seeing them by november.
It's expensive now because they have to use scanning tunnelling microscopes to manipulate the molecules.
But once they build a few nanomachines in this expensive way, they can use those machines to build more machines really really cheaply for just the cost of materials (graphite isn't expensive at all).
So in the end, it's going to be super-small AND super-cheap.
Oh, you're gonna pay for that. Especially the purple monkey dishwasher part.