that the future of television advertisement is in-show advertising, tought it would be more subtle than having Buffy drink a Montain Dew and saying "After a slay, there's nothing like a good Montain Dew, right Xander?"
You mean more like "my makeup is so good it survives doing all sorts of things with the undead"...
You like that top Buffy is wearing and would like to see your girlfriend in it? Then just click on it and you will be redirected to the website of the company who makes and sells it.
Problem is there actually needs to be a company making the garment or product. There probably would be a big market for "superhero clothing" which stayed neat whatever happened to the wearer.
Better Commercials!. SOME commercials are actually done with the notion that they should also have some entertainment value. (A number of the "M&M's" commercials come to mind). Make the commercials WORTH watching and people won't skip them.
So long as they are not overplayed. Possibly no more than once per programme/hour.
If it's done "unobtrusively" (or in a comically blatant way on occasion) it merely makes the shows more "realistic", rather than distracting the viewer excessively from the show itself.
In some cases it can make things more realistic, in other cases less realistic.
This already happens. Pay attention during TV shows and movies (which, by the way, we *are* already paying to see) - there are tons of product placement. A few that come to mind: iBooks and iMacs in several prime time shows, and Seinfeld used to have a Klein mountain bike prominently displayed in his apt.
The thing is that you can only use product placement for things which are widely available long term. Typically product, brand, supplier/etc recognition. If that product or brand ceases to exist it can look silly and just can't handle local advertisments or time sensitive promotions.
Another problem with your simple calculation is that video is never stored as 32-bit color. That's totally unrealistic. The common way to store video is not RGB, but YUV. Because of the way the human visual system works, the color components (U,V) are typically stored at 1/4 the resolution of the luminance (Y), meaning that an 3*X pixel RGB image would be stored as a X+X/4+X/4=1.5X image in YUV, half the number of pixels.
The original idea behind YUV was to enable colour broadcast TV which is compatable with existing monochrome broadcasts. It's not uncommon to do high speed filming in monochrome so you may need only the Y component.
You're walking down the street in front of the bank where you've got your accounts, and there is a "Closed" sign on the bank front door. You check the door, and it's unlocked, and all the lights are on. You open the door and walk in, and see that there is money laid out in piles, and the safe is open. You still don't see anyone, so you walk out the front door, and you call a press conference saying that the bank is unlocked.
That is what happened.
The silly part on their part was holding the press conference, not checking the door. In this analogy, I would have told the bank officials first. Then, I would have checked the door a few days later. If the door was still unlocked, then I would hold the press conference.
Actually holding the press conference is for CYA. If you just told them they might call you a bank robber or try hard to pretend it never happened.
The dirty little secret of the military is that sensitive information is a lot more important than classified stuff. Engineering data that was classified in 1950, that made it into every textbook by 1960, is still locked in a safe at night because it's too much work to declassify anything. The day to day functioning of the military tells any enemy everything they might care about and that never gets classified.
The basic problem is that effective security is hard, it can be easier to give the illusion of security. Hence ending up with locking technical data which is in the public domain up in a safe. Sometimes serious things get overlooked, e.g. the Japanese gathering data on where ships were at Pearl Harbour.
Hey even the top secret nuclear stuff doesn' really matter since the information to build a nuke was long ago published, and the high tech stuff the US and Russia have isn't of interest to anyone. It's already expensive to build a nuke that takes out Manhattan, building one that takes out the Jersey City in the same hit is just a waste of money.
I recall it being said that in the 70's there were something like a million people who knew or could work out the triggering details of a hydrogen bomb. Information which was at that time, and may still be, classified.
But what kind of gas masks are being packed for the attack on Iraq, well that could be useful.
As could the amounts of any type of supply to a war zone. How many gas masks gives an indication of how many soldiers might be involved.
OSS always makes a replacement, but it is only 98% there in terms of functionality in most cases.
Since in many cases people may only use a minority of the "features" this probably isn't an issue. Indeed there may well be more that 2% used by nobody (or only ever used by malware).
On the other hand, building a huge beast of an app that doesn't really interest them and will only be used by corporations doesn't really draw a crowd of developers willing to work for free.
That's because the only way to make a "huge beast of an app" viable is to package it as a product. Probably very few people would use all of its "features" A more interesting question is if a huge monolithic app (either server or client) is the best way to get the job done in the first place. The problem with a monopoly like Microsoft's is that their stuff is used as a yardstick even when it's an awful solution. Proprietary (especially box shifted) software tends to go for a monolithic throw in everything including the kitchen sink type of approach, whereas open source tends to go for a more modular and structured design.
This is just a joke. You cannot sue anyone, the EULA covers that. The only people who can have trump that are people like the USAF who can arrange for a bomb to come off an aircraft, then remind Microsoft that not only have bombs been known to fall off aircraft they have sometimes been known to be armed. (Even an unarmed nuke will make a big mess though.)
Clearly, in a situation such as this, current paper voting mechanisims are much more accurate and reliable.
IMHO the best application of technology would be to design ballot papers which can easily be counted either by machine or manually. A sorting machine could also compare ballot papers with counterfoils. If each paper has a random but unique serial number it's going to be hard for anyone to stuff the ballot and any "spoilt papers" can be eliminated. There are also fewer ways in which you can rig a counter-collator in the first place. It's also very easy to spot since any questions about its sorting and you count manually.
And what happens when the contained program decides it wants to query the cd as to whether it's valid or how many licenses you have left? It'll require patching the software as well which could be difficult.
If you do this how can you have multiple licences on one CD, since it can only be in one drive at once? Anyway program which insisted on the CD being in the drive all the time would be a very unpopular form of dongle.
in windows, you can change your language at ANY time from an icon in the system tray, you don't even need to log off and on again.
Definitly untrue since you don't have a "system tray" all the time. Can you alter the login box in Win2K to be able to select which language here. AFAIK you cannot. With gdm or kdm you can select the launguage before logging in. You could even change the interface to a set of buttons with flags on, which is rather more intuitive than having a little blue box with 2 letters, which may or may not match an ISO country code, somewhere around the bottom right.
Usually I say it is trivial to bypass almost any security measure, but after reading the article, it sounds like this one could be tough to crack, as these are not 'normal' off the shelf CDs
The way it's operation is described makes it something of a waste of time. You can just copy the data after decryption.
(a)(4) Communications regarding Laws, Governmental Regulations, Policies or activities.
You don't really need any more clauses. As written this is a giant loophole, simply mention a law, regulation, policy, etc and you can then say whatevert you like.
The cost needed to run a successful campaign in the US is already ridiculous. And this weeds out people who cannot obtain truckloads of corporate money - surely not a good thing.
As well as people not associated with the Democratic and Republican parties. Yet IIRC a majority of the US electorate don't vote. Some of these voters undoubtedly because they can't find a candidate not opposed to their position.Whilst allowing spam is unlikely to be the answer it seems clear that the US needs some method to enable indepdendents and "third party" (including maybe "The flying circus party") to stand on a basis more equal to that of the democratic or republican party endorsed candidate.
Why is mudslinging bad? Because it's often half-true, or with a massive spin. Find yourself a non-partisan group that digs up info on all the candidates, and then it'll be a bit better.
Especially if the same mud would stick to more than one candidate. Which is quite likely where you have two large political parties and the same questionably entities trying to lobby both of them.
If you believe Chernin that a theft took place then it doesn't matter whether the movies made or lost money. Its still theft.
Except that it isn't "theft" and indeed never was "theft". Theft involves taking something away from someone so they no longer have it. Copyright infringement involves taking a copy, the original is still there. For the last few hundred years what has limited copyright infringment wasn't that it was against the law so much that IP was strongly bound to a media (a piece of real property). We not have a situation where "content" can be trivially duplicated and sent anywhere on the planet. Almost exactly like material objects in the Star Trek universe.
As a matter of fact, it's not. It's a Democratic Republic. Which means that the majority of our elected representative's views become law and are enforced, for worse and for worser, by the executive branch.
If you want this to stop, vote for statesmen instead of lawyers and politicians.
You'd first need to get such statesmen to stand as candidates. Quite probably without the support of the existing political parties. Who'd probably not want to deal with principled states men and women.
We have copyright laws for a good reason, and they should be protected.
Copyright laws are intended as a means to an end rather than an end in themselves. Rather than blindly defending the status quo it makes more sense to consider if these "good reasons" are still valid and assuming they are that the current copyright laws actually address those reasons.
I remember reading that the Apple Stores which allow anyone to play on their computers push the entire disk image to the computers every night. This way it ensures they are all the same afterwards and everyone has the same experience.
This sounds a sledgehammer to crack a nut. It should only be necessary if there are no effective access controls to prevent end users trampling on system areas.
Slashdot Mirror
that the future of television advertisement is in-show advertising, tought it would be more subtle than having Buffy drink a Montain Dew and saying "After a slay, there's nothing like a good Montain Dew, right Xander?"
You mean more like "my makeup is so good it survives doing all sorts of things with the undead"...
You like that top Buffy is wearing and would like to see your girlfriend in it? Then just click on it and you will be redirected to the website of the company who makes and sells it.
Problem is there actually needs to be a company making the garment or product. There probably would be a big market for "superhero clothing" which stayed neat whatever happened to the wearer.
Better Commercials!. SOME commercials are actually done with the notion that they should also have some entertainment value. (A number of the "M&M's" commercials come to mind). Make the commercials WORTH watching and people won't skip them.
So long as they are not overplayed. Possibly no more than once per programme/hour.
If it's done "unobtrusively" (or in a comically blatant way on occasion) it merely makes the shows more "realistic", rather than distracting the viewer excessively from the show itself.
In some cases it can make things more realistic, in other cases less realistic.
This already happens. Pay attention during TV shows and movies (which, by the way, we *are* already paying to see) - there are tons of product placement. A few that come to mind: iBooks and iMacs in several prime time shows, and Seinfeld used to have a Klein mountain bike prominently displayed in his apt.
The thing is that you can only use product placement for things which are widely available long term. Typically product, brand, supplier/etc recognition.
If that product or brand ceases to exist it can look silly and just can't handle local advertisments or time sensitive promotions.
Another problem with your simple calculation is that video is never stored as 32-bit color. That's totally unrealistic. The common way to store video is not RGB, but YUV. Because of the way the human visual system works, the color components (U,V) are typically stored at 1/4 the resolution of the luminance (Y), meaning that an 3*X pixel RGB image would be stored as a X+X/4+X/4=1.5X image in YUV, half the number of pixels.
The original idea behind YUV was to enable colour broadcast TV which is compatable with existing monochrome broadcasts.
It's not uncommon to do high speed filming in monochrome so you may need only the Y component.
You're walking down the street in front of the bank where you've got your accounts, and there is a "Closed" sign on the bank front door. You check the door, and it's unlocked, and all the lights are on. You open the door and walk in, and see that there is money laid out in piles, and the safe is open. You still don't see anyone, so you walk out the front door, and you call a press conference saying that the bank is unlocked.
That is what happened.
The silly part on their part was holding the press conference, not checking the door. In this analogy, I would have told the bank officials first. Then, I would have checked the door a few days later. If the door was still unlocked, then I would hold the press conference.
Actually holding the press conference is for CYA. If you just told them they might call you a bank robber or try hard to pretend it never happened.
The dirty little secret of the military is that sensitive information is a lot more important than classified stuff. Engineering data that was classified in 1950, that made it into every textbook by 1960, is still locked in a safe at night because it's too much work to declassify anything. The day to day functioning of the military tells any enemy everything they might care about and that never gets classified.
The basic problem is that effective security is hard, it can be easier to give the illusion of security. Hence ending up with locking technical data which is in the public domain up in a safe. Sometimes serious things get overlooked, e.g. the Japanese gathering data on where ships were at Pearl Harbour.
Hey even the top secret nuclear stuff doesn' really matter since the information to build a nuke was long ago published, and the high tech stuff the US and Russia have isn't of interest to anyone. It's already expensive to build a nuke that takes out Manhattan, building one that takes out the Jersey City in the same hit is just a waste of money.
I recall it being said that in the 70's there were something like a million people who knew or could work out the triggering details of a hydrogen bomb. Information which was at that time, and may still be, classified.
But what kind of gas masks are being packed for the attack on Iraq, well that could be useful.
As could the amounts of any type of supply to a war zone. How many gas masks gives an indication of how many soldiers might be involved.
You could also make a citizen's arrest
Wonder how effective one would be were the criminal a law enforcement officer.
OSS always makes a replacement, but it is only 98% there in terms of functionality in most cases.
Since in many cases people may only use a minority of the "features" this probably isn't an issue. Indeed there may well be more that 2% used by nobody (or only ever used by malware).
I always hear about point #4 under the client side. "It's gotta work just like the Microsoft tool or users won't like it."
It's because Microsoft tends to be judged as some kind of yardstick, even when it makes little sense to do so.
On the other hand, building a huge beast of an app that doesn't really interest them and will only be used by corporations doesn't really draw a crowd of developers willing to work for free.
That's because the only way to make a "huge beast of an app" viable is to package it as a product. Probably very few people would use all of its "features"
A more interesting question is if a huge monolithic app (either server or client) is the best way to get the job done in the first place. The problem with a monopoly like Microsoft's is that their stuff is used as a yardstick even when it's an awful solution.
Proprietary (especially box shifted) software tends to go for a monolithic throw in everything including the kitchen sink type of approach, whereas open source tends to go for a more modular and structured design.
Next, they like to have someone to sue.
This is just a joke. You cannot sue anyone, the EULA covers that. The only people who can have trump that are people like the USAF who can arrange for a bomb to come off an aircraft, then remind Microsoft that not only have bombs been known to fall off aircraft they have sometimes been known to be armed. (Even an unarmed nuke will make a big mess though.)
Clearly, in a situation such as this, current paper voting mechanisims are much more accurate and reliable.
IMHO the best application of technology would be to design ballot papers which can easily be counted either by machine or manually. A sorting machine could also compare ballot papers with counterfoils. If each paper has a random but unique serial number it's going to be hard for anyone to stuff the ballot and any "spoilt papers" can be eliminated.
There are also fewer ways in which you can rig a counter-collator in the first place. It's also very easy to spot since any questions about its sorting and you count manually.
For me, the cost of running Red Hat 7.3 on that machine is not zero. It was about two hours of my time.
But you would have spent time setting up the machine, whatever the OS.
And what happens when the contained program decides it wants to query the cd as to whether it's valid or how many licenses you have left? It'll require patching the software as well which could be difficult.
If you do this how can you have multiple licences on one CD, since it can only be in one drive at once? Anyway program which insisted on the CD being in the drive all the time would be a very unpopular form of dongle.
in windows, you can change your language at ANY time from an icon in the system tray, you don't even need to log off and on again.
Definitly untrue since you don't have a "system tray" all the time. Can you alter the login box in Win2K to be able to select which language here. AFAIK you cannot. With gdm or kdm you can select the launguage before logging in. You could even change the interface to a set of buttons with flags on, which is rather more intuitive than having a little blue box with 2 letters, which may or may not match an ISO country code, somewhere around the bottom right.
Usually I say it is trivial to bypass almost any security measure, but after reading the article, it sounds like this one could be tough to crack, as these are not 'normal' off the shelf CDs
The way it's operation is described makes it something of a waste of time. You can just copy the data after decryption.
(a)(4) Communications regarding Laws, Governmental Regulations, Policies or activities.
You don't really need any more clauses. As written this is a giant loophole, simply mention a law, regulation, policy, etc and you can then say whatevert you like.
The cost needed to run a successful campaign in the US is already ridiculous. And this weeds out people who cannot obtain truckloads of corporate money - surely not a good thing.
As well as people not associated with the Democratic and Republican parties. Yet IIRC a majority of the US electorate don't vote. Some of these voters undoubtedly because they can't find a candidate not opposed to their position.Whilst allowing spam is unlikely to be the answer it seems clear that the US needs some method to enable indepdendents and "third party" (including maybe "The flying circus party") to stand on a basis more equal to that of the democratic or republican party endorsed candidate.
Why is mudslinging bad? Because it's often half-true, or with a massive spin. Find yourself a non-partisan group that digs up info on all the candidates, and then it'll be a bit better.
Especially if the same mud would stick to more than one candidate. Which is quite likely where you have two large political parties and the same questionably entities trying to lobby both of them.
If you believe Chernin that a theft took place then it doesn't matter whether the movies made or lost money. Its still theft.
Except that it isn't "theft" and indeed never was "theft". Theft involves taking something away from someone so they no longer have it. Copyright infringement involves taking a copy, the original is still there.
For the last few hundred years what has limited copyright infringment wasn't that it was against the law so much that IP was strongly bound to a media (a piece of real property).
We not have a situation where "content" can be trivially duplicated and sent anywhere on the planet. Almost exactly like material objects in the Star Trek universe.
As a matter of fact, it's not. It's a Democratic Republic. Which means that the majority of our elected representative's views become law and are enforced, for worse and for worser, by the executive branch.
If you want this to stop, vote for statesmen instead of lawyers and politicians.
You'd first need to get such statesmen to stand as candidates. Quite probably without the support of the existing political parties. Who'd probably not want to deal with principled states men and women.
The grocery store purchased those grapes from someone else, who will also feel a pinch, no matter how miniscule.
Unlikely, since they probably made sure that they have a contract with the grocery store to be paid for the grapes they delivered.
We have copyright laws for a good reason, and they should be protected.
Copyright laws are intended as a means to an end rather than an end in themselves. Rather than blindly defending the status quo it makes more sense to consider if these "good reasons" are still valid and assuming they are that the current copyright laws actually address those reasons.
Some BIOSes let you lock down the floppy drive too,
/dev/fd1 and it cannot be booted from at all.
Even if they don't reconnect the FDD as
I remember reading that the Apple Stores which allow anyone to play on their computers push the entire disk image to the computers every night. This way it ensures they are all the same afterwards and everyone has the same experience.
This sounds a sledgehammer to crack a nut. It should only be necessary if there are no effective access controls to prevent end users trampling on system areas.