Same with Facebook. We, the users, make Facebook a great, big site with our data and our invested time. Then the government goons come along and say "Ha Ha! We'll find out everything we want about you by poaching your Facebook data!"
Do you seriously think facebook stuck around because of your work and not because corporations already did the same thing and paid facebook to keep the servers on? Or do you just think that (nearly unrestricted) corporate privacy invasion is less bad than government privacy invasion?
Just watch it. It's amazingly obvious. This isn't audiophile/videophile BS. It's easy to tell the difference between 15, 25, 30, 60 fps in video games. It's very easy to tell that the movie on the big screen is double-frame-rate. It's about as subtle as Michael Bay.
You want them to make games much more complex--with completely destructible environments, near limitless borders, better AI, more complex NPC's, etc.
Like Nethack!
But you also want them to be CHEAPER? Okay.
Nethack is free!
And you complain about how long it takes to develop a triple-A title, so I guess you also want them SOONER too, huh?
Nethack will be available twenty-five years ago!
Go Nethack!
All joking aside, roguelikes exhibit this kind of complexity, yet it takes quite a bit of time for them to develop that complexity (tangent: are roguelikes gaming wine?), and that's with ascii art. Once you have graphics, you lose the justification for "use your imagination" and have to have different graphics for the 9000 different objects in the loot table, etc.
Also most people don't really have the time for that kind of game unless it's the only game they play.
A lot could go wrong, but hopefully they're talking about dropping it at L1 and not actually bringing it into LEO/MEO. After all, we already have a rather large chunk of rock in orbit. A fair-sized asteroid at L1 would make a great place for a real space station, especially if it's ice and rock... water, breathable air, and a place to build, and you don't have to do anything to keep it there. And the moon is a short jump away.
This a big problem with Slashdot. If they don't like what you say, you'll be modded off-topic.
I think you should apply your own statement to yourself. If you feel "lost basic sense of trust in everything," "19 percent have confidence in big business," and a general lack of trust in governing bodies is somehow not tragically contradicted by giving personal, private data to all of those to whom trust is lacking, you're part of the problem.
People will say one thing ("I don't trust X"), yet their actions show that this is either false, or they are easily misled.
This benefits customers, because they get items cheaper. Amazon has no presence in the state, so why should they have to pay sales tax? Gas tax already covers any usage of the roads etc by shipping and delivery companies. And it's not a big hit for local businesses because for the extra $0.50 a customer gets to have the product now.
In short, the only ones who "lose" are Colorado politicians. And if there was a federal sales tax, Colorado wouldn't get a cut, anyway.
There's a very simple lesson here: If you think your work is worth something, don't give it away for free.
Yeah wouldn't want to give anything of value away for free. Just think what would have happened if Linus had given away Linux all those years ago. Wait...
Better lesson: If you do something without charge, don't be a cheap bastard and turn around later demanding compensation.
If nothing else, especially in a case where something becomes hugely popular/profitable/etc, you can use the popularity in a self-promotional manner, which is probably more valuable than any other compensation in the long run anyway. Good luck doing that after something like this.
My coworkers all think I'm weird because if I need the caffeine in the morning, I drink a coke.
That's probably because according to Mayo Clinic at least, a 12oz bottle of coke has 30-35mg of caffeine, and a cup of brewed Starbucks coffee has 330mg. A cup of Starbucks decaf has 25mg, so you're essentially drinking slightly more than what regular coffee drinkers would consider decaf.
That said, coffee doesn't always taste like crap. I'm pretty picky myself and wouldn't touch the sludge you get at work or restaurants for the most part that's been sitting there all day. However, $25 gets you an Aeropress which makes coffee that tastes excellent, quickly. Of course you'd also want a coffee grinder and ideally 175F water on demand, but hey, you don't need an expensive coffee maker.
I was actually slightly interested until I got to this bit and realized, like any other Microsoft "innovation," it wasn't really at all. Anyone can make a custom voice sample in about an hour. Hooking up simple voice recognition and text-to-speech is incredibly dull.
Had they actually interpreted intonation for semantics, and simulated and learned your voice in real time, it would have been pretty neat.
They're fixing the problem. You bought a phone with the expectation it would work under normal circumstances (i.e. being held), it didn't, and this forces them to rectify the issue.
You aren't entitled to out-of-proportion rewards, like millions of dollars, Apple being put out of business, a new phone, or even a refund. You bought a phone with a poor antenna design, and they provided a satisfactory workaround. Get over it.
If it's more profitable to use lots of "fresh" water than it is to reduce that water usage through different agricultural methods, then a good businessman will continue to use lots of "fresh" water.
If the opposite becomes true, then a good businessman will adjust accordingly.
You forgot the "then charge a premium, claiming water is expensive, while lobbying Congress to reduce regulation and taxes" part.
"Undetectably encrypted". No. There really is no such thing. "Obfuscated", "disguised", ok I'll take those, but not "undetectably". Makes it sound like it's flat out impossible to figure out the traffic contains encrypted data.
Trivially, if you have a regular message that's filled with noise, it's easy to filter. Less trivially, if you have a message that encodes encrypted messages as normal-looking sentences, you might be able to filter it, though the generation of such could get pretty sophisticated. Far less trivially, you could spread the encoded encryption across multiple channels (a few bits in an email, a few bits in an IM, a few bits in an HTTP request). The better the encryption, the less distinguishable from purely random data it is. Then you have to detect close-to-random data encoded randomly across streams of other-random-data.
It may be doable, but it's an arms race. The steganographers just have to change their schemes every now and then, which doesn't take much. The people doing the detection are eventually going to have to spend all resources on doing so. Who's to tell the few bits of the digital photo someone took combined with a few words in an IM and a URL someone visited resulted in passing a message or receiving one?
Of course, once you have the opposition doing nothing but trying to find hidden messages in every bit of information around them, you've won.
I agree fully with the majority of your post. In fact, I think this is the only sentence I don't. People want 3D. But they want the 3D that's in Star Wars and science fiction, not the 3DS. I actively sought out a 3DS in Best Buy just to see the 3D, because while I've never been interested in touch and motion control as particularly useful to gaming, I think that 3D certainly could be.
But spending 30 seconds using a 3DS and playing Pilotwings Resort, it's clear from the dizzying headache that these are not the three D's I'm looking for. And I'd have to say that Nintendo probably sold fewer because people were more interested in 3D, and turned off by the demo units, than simple lack of interest in 3D. I'm personally waiting to see if the inevitable 3DSP Lite+ XL Platinum Shiny Edition is any better in this regard. Til then the Vita should do nicely.
Citizens should be free to work in the best environment for them.
So what's stopping someone from applying for another job? This is all about poaching: that is, the thing Microsoft did back in the day to kill Borland by making ridiculous offers to a direct competitor's employees to effectively hobble the company. How is that not evil?
If Google was sorting through their data to determine who the top Apple/Pixar/etc developers were and making them offers they couldn't refuse in an effort to stymie competition, that would be worth bitching about. There is nothing stopping anyone from applying for a job on their own time, and none of this is about not hiring the competition... it's just about not actively seeking out competitor's employees at their workplaces.
If it comes to light that these companies were actively refusing employment and reporting applications to their competitors (for "disciplinary purposes"), then it will be evil. Not pestering employees during work hours with potentially embarrassing job offers seems more like courtesy.
A new user profile with a very fast first pro-MS post about the successes of MS and Windows? Can't possibly be a shill. I'm actually curious whether these people are paid for this stuff or they're just insecure MS employees with nothing better to do.
Like them or not, at least you don't see Google and Apple stooping to these levels.
Adblock only works by recognizing the domain hosting the image/scripts or common path names.
Toss that banner add on the cloud, or have it hosted locally by the site owners(in a non-"banners" or "ads" subdirectory) and for the most part you've got it beat. Advertisers haven't adapted because there's not a big enough incentive to. But if push ever comes to shove, they'll win.
They will never win. Look at it this way. You've essentially said that advertising gets dirtier the less people respond, and if everyone used Adblock, advertising would get so dirty we couldn't win.
Yet, spam is probably the dirtiest advertising there is. There is likely no trick the spammers have not tried. Send from any host, embed stuff in reasonble-looking text, etc. Yet spam detection is very, very good, to the extent that spam is on the decline.
Advertisers will never win, because you can write better software that detects ads. Adblock's simple host and XPATH detection is all that's there because it's all that's necessary right now. It would however probably not be that hard to write image detection software that can process images and assign a AD-PROBABILITY value to them. Use the cloud against the advertisers... just set up software that learns by user submission on a cluster and click on an ad to submit it. Consult the "cloud" for any new images.
But, until most people care about ads the way they care about spam, it's not going to be necessary. Unfortunately we're so culturally inundated with advertisement that it's just not a thing. Though while this may look like a win for advertisers, it does make ad removal trivial for those of us who care.
Is this a geek trope or some sort of pretentious "vinyl sounds better than CDs"/"old stuff is more real" sort of thing? That's not geeky. Geeky is going to SIGGRAPH, developing 3D tools and hardware, etc. I'm not sure what sort of geek normally hates Computer Generated Imagery.
(Though, geeks hating the other CGI makes sense, I'd say.)
Cuz in the end, its not about catching people who run lights. Enforcing the law is not an end in and of itself, its supposed to be a means to an end. Who cares if we can "catch" more people? It may feel good and let someone justify their job with some metrics but, it doesn't solve the original problem of risks and dangers....not in anything even approaching a realistic way.
Unfortunately, while sane, thoughtful people would come to this conclusion, someone, somewhere would rather make a profit off of it. This isn't theoretical, it's already happened, as some cities would rather profit at the expense and injury of motorists. What this does to insurance and medical rates I hate to think.
This sort of thing would be great for "dynamic yellow lights," as you implied. A sane, rational person would use this to make a yellow light last a little longer to prevent an accident. People like the above could widen the range a little and make it shorten the yellow light to catch a few extra bucks. It's not the technology; this algorithm is cool and great. It's the few abusers.
Slashdot Mirror
Do you seriously think facebook stuck around because of your work and not because corporations already did the same thing and paid facebook to keep the servers on? Or do you just think that (nearly unrestricted) corporate privacy invasion is less bad than government privacy invasion?
Just watch it. It's amazingly obvious. This isn't audiophile/videophile BS. It's easy to tell the difference between 15, 25, 30, 60 fps in video games. It's very easy to tell that the movie on the big screen is double-frame-rate. It's about as subtle as Michael Bay.
Like Nethack!
Nethack is free!
Nethack will be available twenty-five years ago!
Go Nethack!
All joking aside, roguelikes exhibit this kind of complexity, yet it takes quite a bit of time for them to develop that complexity (tangent: are roguelikes gaming wine?), and that's with ascii art. Once you have graphics, you lose the justification for "use your imagination" and have to have different graphics for the 9000 different objects in the loot table, etc.
Also most people don't really have the time for that kind of game unless it's the only game they play.
That said, I wouldn't mind!
Proving once again that organics will be outclassed by synthetics? What, wrong game?
(The label "organics" always amused me.)
I'm actually curious as to how big of a speck an asteroid at L1 would be and how many people would complain it upset their view of the moon. ;)
A lot could go wrong, but hopefully they're talking about dropping it at L1 and not actually bringing it into LEO/MEO. After all, we already have a rather large chunk of rock in orbit. A fair-sized asteroid at L1 would make a great place for a real space station, especially if it's ice and rock ... water, breathable air, and a place to build, and you don't have to do anything to keep it there. And the moon is a short jump away.
I think you should apply your own statement to yourself. If you feel "lost basic sense of trust in everything," "19 percent have confidence in big business," and a general lack of trust in governing bodies is somehow not tragically contradicted by giving personal, private data to all of those to whom trust is lacking, you're part of the problem.
People will say one thing ("I don't trust X"), yet their actions show that this is either false, or they are easily misled.
They'll post every detail about their life on Facebook.
This benefits customers, because they get items cheaper. Amazon has no presence in the state, so why should they have to pay sales tax? Gas tax already covers any usage of the roads etc by shipping and delivery companies. And it's not a big hit for local businesses because for the extra $0.50 a customer gets to have the product now.
In short, the only ones who "lose" are Colorado politicians. And if there was a federal sales tax, Colorado wouldn't get a cut, anyway.
Is pickled radiation any less harmful?
Yeah wouldn't want to give anything of value away for free. Just think what would have happened if Linus had given away Linux all those years ago. Wait...
Better lesson: If you do something without charge, don't be a cheap bastard and turn around later demanding compensation.
If nothing else, especially in a case where something becomes hugely popular/profitable/etc, you can use the popularity in a self-promotional manner, which is probably more valuable than any other compensation in the long run anyway. Good luck doing that after something like this.
That's probably because according to Mayo Clinic at least, a 12oz bottle of coke has 30-35mg of caffeine, and a cup of brewed Starbucks coffee has 330mg. A cup of Starbucks decaf has 25mg, so you're essentially drinking slightly more than what regular coffee drinkers would consider decaf.
That said, coffee doesn't always taste like crap. I'm pretty picky myself and wouldn't touch the sludge you get at work or restaurants for the most part that's been sitting there all day. However, $25 gets you an Aeropress which makes coffee that tastes excellent, quickly. Of course you'd also want a coffee grinder and ideally 175F water on demand, but hey, you don't need an expensive coffee maker.
3) You have to train it for an hour?
I was actually slightly interested until I got to this bit and realized, like any other Microsoft "innovation," it wasn't really at all. Anyone can make a custom voice sample in about an hour. Hooking up simple voice recognition and text-to-speech is incredibly dull.
Had they actually interpreted intonation for semantics, and simulated and learned your voice in real time, it would have been pretty neat.
They're fixing the problem. You bought a phone with the expectation it would work under normal circumstances (i.e. being held), it didn't, and this forces them to rectify the issue.
You aren't entitled to out-of-proportion rewards, like millions of dollars, Apple being put out of business, a new phone, or even a refund. You bought a phone with a poor antenna design, and they provided a satisfactory workaround. Get over it.
You forgot the "then charge a premium, claiming water is expensive, while lobbying Congress to reduce regulation and taxes" part.
Trivially, if you have a regular message that's filled with noise, it's easy to filter. Less trivially, if you have a message that encodes encrypted messages as normal-looking sentences, you might be able to filter it, though the generation of such could get pretty sophisticated. Far less trivially, you could spread the encoded encryption across multiple channels (a few bits in an email, a few bits in an IM, a few bits in an HTTP request). The better the encryption, the less distinguishable from purely random data it is. Then you have to detect close-to-random data encoded randomly across streams of other-random-data.
It may be doable, but it's an arms race. The steganographers just have to change their schemes every now and then, which doesn't take much. The people doing the detection are eventually going to have to spend all resources on doing so. Who's to tell the few bits of the digital photo someone took combined with a few words in an IM and a URL someone visited resulted in passing a message or receiving one?
Of course, once you have the opposition doing nothing but trying to find hidden messages in every bit of information around them, you've won.
I agree fully with the majority of your post. In fact, I think this is the only sentence I don't. People want 3D. But they want the 3D that's in Star Wars and science fiction, not the 3DS. I actively sought out a 3DS in Best Buy just to see the 3D, because while I've never been interested in touch and motion control as particularly useful to gaming, I think that 3D certainly could be.
But spending 30 seconds using a 3DS and playing Pilotwings Resort, it's clear from the dizzying headache that these are not the three D's I'm looking for. And I'd have to say that Nintendo probably sold fewer because people were more interested in 3D, and turned off by the demo units, than simple lack of interest in 3D. I'm personally waiting to see if the inevitable 3DSP Lite+ XL Platinum Shiny Edition is any better in this regard. Til then the Vita should do nicely.
So what's stopping someone from applying for another job? This is all about poaching: that is, the thing Microsoft did back in the day to kill Borland by making ridiculous offers to a direct competitor's employees to effectively hobble the company. How is that not evil?
If Google was sorting through their data to determine who the top Apple/Pixar/etc developers were and making them offers they couldn't refuse in an effort to stymie competition, that would be worth bitching about. There is nothing stopping anyone from applying for a job on their own time, and none of this is about not hiring the competition... it's just about not actively seeking out competitor's employees at their workplaces.
If it comes to light that these companies were actively refusing employment and reporting applications to their competitors (for "disciplinary purposes"), then it will be evil. Not pestering employees during work hours with potentially embarrassing job offers seems more like courtesy.
A new user profile with a very fast first pro-MS post about the successes of MS and Windows? Can't possibly be a shill. I'm actually curious whether these people are paid for this stuff or they're just insecure MS employees with nothing better to do.
Like them or not, at least you don't see Google and Apple stooping to these levels.
As soon as you submit a patch to Slashcode for slashdotters .
They will never win. Look at it this way. You've essentially said that advertising gets dirtier the less people respond, and if everyone used Adblock, advertising would get so dirty we couldn't win.
Yet, spam is probably the dirtiest advertising there is. There is likely no trick the spammers have not tried. Send from any host, embed stuff in reasonble-looking text, etc. Yet spam detection is very, very good, to the extent that spam is on the decline.
Advertisers will never win, because you can write better software that detects ads. Adblock's simple host and XPATH detection is all that's there because it's all that's necessary right now. It would however probably not be that hard to write image detection software that can process images and assign a AD-PROBABILITY value to them. Use the cloud against the advertisers ... just set up software that learns by user submission on a cluster and click on an ad to submit it. Consult the "cloud" for any new images.
But, until most people care about ads the way they care about spam, it's not going to be necessary. Unfortunately we're so culturally inundated with advertisement that it's just not a thing. Though while this may look like a win for advertisers, it does make ad removal trivial for those of us who care.
Is this a geek trope or some sort of pretentious "vinyl sounds better than CDs"/"old stuff is more real" sort of thing? That's not geeky. Geeky is going to SIGGRAPH, developing 3D tools and hardware, etc. I'm not sure what sort of geek normally hates Computer Generated Imagery.
(Though, geeks hating the other CGI makes sense, I'd say.)
Who is a reputable registrar these days? Does such a thing exist?
Unfortunately, while sane, thoughtful people would come to this conclusion, someone, somewhere would rather make a profit off of it. This isn't theoretical, it's already happened, as some cities would rather profit at the expense and injury of motorists. What this does to insurance and medical rates I hate to think.
This sort of thing would be great for "dynamic yellow lights," as you implied. A sane, rational person would use this to make a yellow light last a little longer to prevent an accident. People like the above could widen the range a little and make it shorten the yellow light to catch a few extra bucks. It's not the technology; this algorithm is cool and great. It's the few abusers.
Standards.
And assuming he wants to make it "like a startup" that means small unbureaucratic groups, shoestring budget, and likely to fail. Good luck.