As well as GMail, the new Google Custom Frontpage (You know you can drag those boxes around?), and hmm.. well, just disable JS in your browser and see how many websites still function. It's ubiquity is why popups exist, as the GP pointed out, but the reason popup blocking software exists is because simply turning off JS would "break the internet," in the eyes of most users.
Hole punches aren't exactly trivial, and do/did require some amount of engineering to make them simple to use. It's still not particularly trivial to manufacture one.
I'd say the paper clip is a better example of trivial but non-obvious.
The original DiVX scheme (no relation to the topic of this thread) would seem to suggest otherwise.
Not to mention, consumers aren't the only factor here. If reviewers start screaming Bloody Mary over some new DRM locked down hardware with little to no advantage over current technology, it could make it difficult for the technology to gain a foothold.
On the flip side, I didn't hear a word about DVDs being encrypted until the technology started becoming popular.. but that could just be because DVD burners were expensive and people were just copying movies to VHS using macrovision blockers or whatever.
That sounds all well and good, but I can't think of a single method of verifying that a finger (or any other source of biometric data) is alive, can you?
Temperature could be easily bypassed. Pulse could be easily faked by intentionally manipluating the pressure you place on the sensor, or by tapping on the back of the finger if it "listened" for the heartbeat. And of course if there's a separate sensor aside from the fingerprint reader/retinal scanner/facial identifyer, well then, the person trying to bypass the system is likely to be alive.
The system to access the buildings I've worked in used biometric ID combined with a PIN. The system's a joke, although you wouldn't think it funny if you knew what went on there.
But really, who doesn't drive? Among people who live in an area with mass transit (Let's say 50% of the US), maybe 15% of those people don't drive daily, even if they take public transportation to and from work/school. Drivers licenses are de facto ID cards. I spent a few years as an adult without a drivers license because I honestly didn't need one, and it's a pain. Every time I needed an ID, I was viewed with suspicion for using an alternate ID (military usually).
Price? I can get 50 blank DVDs for $25.. That's $.50 each. (Cheaper at Froogle) The cheapest I can find tapes for is $.55 ea.
Of course I just realized you were talking about movies rather than blank media.. I guess I've never really understood why people buy movies though. The plot never seems to change the second time I watch it, but it sure does drag on longer. Generally I'll only watch something more than once if it's for the benefit of someone who hasn't seen it.
Point taken though.. definately cheaper for those who choose to buy movies.
In most states, it's already illegal not to carry ID, unless you're one of those people who doesn't drive. In every state I've lived in, if you're pulled over and you don't have your license (ID) on you, you could be arrested. In some states, it's technically not required to carry ID, but it's illegal to fail to, or to improperly identify yourself when legally asked.. and of course the only way to prove that you're not lying is to show your ID.
And really, you don't have to be doing anything wrong to be pulled over. When I was younger, I was in the car when my tea-totaler of a mother was pulled over on suspision of DUI. (I'll refrain from making any comments about female drivers). To be clear, her unwaivering habit of going at or below the speed limit, combined with some failed attempts to change lanes (to avoid getting rear ended by, well, anyone else on the road) caught the attention of a police car behind us. And yes, it was Sunday morning, and yes, we were on our way to church. Nothing came of it, but the point is that not breaking the law is no protection. Most states have sanctioned DUI checkpoints already. To save the children of course.
In Soviet Russia, jokes get all the Google anyone could ever want.
Re:Only going to work if it became standard
on
Advocating Dvorak
·
· Score: 1
Arghh.. I hated switching between the C64/128 style layout and the standard PC layout.. I think I hit Shift-2 for quotation marks on a PC for years afterwards. (What the hell is this @ symbol?!?) I seem to remember some problem with the modifiers and backspace layouts as well.. not to mention the function keys.
You know, this is waaaay off topic, and it's probably immoral of me to even be laughing at you instead of donating to a charitable organization that might be able to help your condition, but on the off chance that you didn't bother to read any of the article you linked to, here's the sumamry:
Claim: Coca-Cola used to contain cocaine. Status: True.
The first option is to filter the IPs at the ISP level (proxy, or whatever method they choose), the second option is to filter the IPs at the customer's workstation using software.. (commercial, 3rd party, whatever). The second option is more expensive.. it makes no sense for any standard ISP to choose option 2.
Except that they'd have to provide the software regardless of what platform the customer is using. It's far easier to just filter IPs, especially since they'd have to write a(n oh so simple) script for some customers anyway, or investigate solutions for the odd customer who's using his Commodore64.
Right.. because moving your head around to switch between two half-resolution images would certainly be much less of a PITA than just having two separate displays, or, God forbid, a physical copy of the reference materials. I wonder what the repetitive stress injury of the neck would be called.. (Maybe Jenna Syndrome?)
Even if people didn't care about resolution (which is why nobody wants an HDTV, right?), the technology has several additional drawbacks.. Namely:
Limited viewing area of the primary image, with the secondary image always faintly visible behind the primary image
Would require two (or more?) tuners
Effectively limited to two images, since additional viewing area reduces the resolution proportionally
Cost - The intended market (families which can't or don't want to spend the money for multiple TVs) will never be able to afford the device, and people who can afford it won't buy it.
I understood you correctly.. what I meant to say was that there's less incentive for companies to set up more broadcast channels. It's not as if the analog spectrum is close to saturated by current VHF/UHF broadcasts. Further, the reason is not because of signal quality, but because it's cost prohibitive to set up all the necessary transmitters. With cable, it's one piece of infrastructure for all channels. Not so for broadcast, nor does cable have to vie for suitable real estate upon which to build a tower.
If the lack of available frequency spectrum were the limiting issue, then certainly I'd expect to see more channels with a switch to digital. It's simply not the biggest prohibitive factor in most markets, nor is picture quality, but rather the much higher earnings potential for cable, with it's lower cost of service and revenues from both advertisers AND viewers.
In the US, many cable providers offer digital cable already, so that wouldn't be as much of a factor. Similarly, many cable boxes also have custom PVR/DVR capabilities and offer a much broader range of channels than broadcast stations in any locale in the continental US. Among people who watch TV, just about anyone who can afford cable (any many who can't) fork out the cash rather than watching broadcast, which generally consists of 4 to 8 channels, depending on where you live. (Although the only channels I ever watch are History & Discovery.. and The Learning Channel, back before it turned into the home improvement/women's channel).
Right.. because there's certainly nothing disturbing or possibly inappropriate on Wikipedia.
(Those links may be considered unsafe for work, and as such I haven't verified that they work at the time of posting).
Anyway, I grew up with unfettered access to, well, BBSes back then, and the 'net in my late teens.. which proves unquestionably that giving kids free reign in what they read and view online leads to/. addiction in later life.
As you say, kids will find access to it anyway.. back in the day it was kids bringing their parents/older sibling's magazines to school, today it's the internet. Not to say parents should provide material that they find inappropriate, or not show their disapproval (if it exists), but nobody should be under the illusion that there's a technical solution to shielding their children from anything they might not want them to see.. even on otherwise benign sites.
Some would argue that this is a dangerous blurring between church and state but democracy by definition is a representative government
Actually that's the definition of a republic, which is a form of democracy, but certainly not the only one.. but that's just a nitpick.
More importantly, and relevant, the Bill of Rights was established to explicitly restrict the laws that a state (or the federal government) can enact, regardless of what the majority believes, and this law is potentially violating those freedoms guaranteed under the Bill of Rights. At least, that's the case that the ACLU will certainly try to make. They will argue that the law, as written, has potential to be enforced with or without the consent of the users, which certainly seems possible from what I read.
260 (3) (a) A service provider may comply with Subsection (1) by: 261 (i) providing network-level in-network filtering to prevent receipt of material harmful to minors; 262 or 263 (ii) providing at the time of a consumer's request under Subsection (1), software for{ } 264 contemporaneous installation on the consumer's computer that blocks, in an easy-to-enable and 265 commercially reasonable manner, receipt of material harmful to minors.
It looks like option (ii) is opt-in, but option (i) is not, since it makes no mention of the consumer's request. And really, what ISP would write custom software rather than implement IP filtering?
It installed and runs just fine on my setup.. the only issue I found was when I hit the Windows key. I won't ruin the surprise for everyone, but let's just say you shouldn't press it if you're offended by profanity.
Slashdot Mirror
As well as GMail, the new Google Custom Frontpage (You know you can drag those boxes around?), and hmm.. well, just disable JS in your browser and see how many websites still function. It's ubiquity is why popups exist, as the GP pointed out, but the reason popup blocking software exists is because simply turning off JS would "break the internet," in the eyes of most users.
Hole punches aren't exactly trivial, and do/did require some amount of engineering to make them simple to use. It's still not particularly trivial to manufacture one.
I'd say the paper clip is a better example of trivial but non-obvious.
The original DiVX scheme (no relation to the topic of this thread) would seem to suggest otherwise.
Not to mention, consumers aren't the only factor here. If reviewers start screaming Bloody Mary over some new DRM locked down hardware with little to no advantage over current technology, it could make it difficult for the technology to gain a foothold.
On the flip side, I didn't hear a word about DVDs being encrypted until the technology started becoming popular.. but that could just be because DVD burners were expensive and people were just copying movies to VHS using macrovision blockers or whatever.
Though tomatoes are particularly easy to grow with hydrophonics.
I've had some experience with this, and I can tell you that I've yet to see a tomato grow because of underwater sounds.
Where do the freaky-deak Dutch figure into all of this? Or did Sid Meier just add them to the game for their funny looking ships?
So French food is to cuisine what grunts are to spoken language?
Nobody want's to eat your French boulliabaise a la creme du tarmac. Now if he were an Italian chef, then we might have something to talk about.
First he's trying to promote his blog, now his cuisine... when will it end?
"Ah weel suejest to you zat zee assturownauwts will reequieur zee amazine talons ouef ze Ferench lewver for ze long treep tu Mars, no?"
No, Roland, no! OMG stop licking us.. what are you doing!?!
Or...heck, just tell KDE/Konq to use Mozilla/Firefox for .*htm* and it will happily do it.
.yachtman files too :(
But then it'll open all my
That sounds all well and good, but I can't think of a single method of verifying that a finger (or any other source of biometric data) is alive, can you?
Temperature could be easily bypassed. Pulse could be easily faked by intentionally manipluating the pressure you place on the sensor, or by tapping on the back of the finger if it "listened" for the heartbeat. And of course if there's a separate sensor aside from the fingerprint reader/retinal scanner/facial identifyer, well then, the person trying to bypass the system is likely to be alive.
The system to access the buildings I've worked in used biometric ID combined with a PIN. The system's a joke, although you wouldn't think it funny if you knew what went on there.
But really, who doesn't drive? Among people who live in an area with mass transit (Let's say 50% of the US), maybe 15% of those people don't drive daily, even if they take public transportation to and from work/school. Drivers licenses are de facto ID cards. I spent a few years as an adult without a drivers license because I honestly didn't need one, and it's a pain. Every time I needed an ID, I was viewed with suspicion for using an alternate ID (military usually).
Price? I can get 50 blank DVDs for $25.. That's $.50 each. (Cheaper at Froogle) The cheapest I can find tapes for is $.55 ea.
Of course I just realized you were talking about movies rather than blank media.. I guess I've never really understood why people buy movies though. The plot never seems to change the second time I watch it, but it sure does drag on longer. Generally I'll only watch something more than once if it's for the benefit of someone who hasn't seen it.
Point taken though.. definately cheaper for those who choose to buy movies.
Tell that to this guy: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/04/04/fingerprin t_merc_chop/
In most states, it's already illegal not to carry ID, unless you're one of those people who doesn't drive. In every state I've lived in, if you're pulled over and you don't have your license (ID) on you, you could be arrested. In some states, it's technically not required to carry ID, but it's illegal to fail to, or to improperly identify yourself when legally asked.. and of course the only way to prove that you're not lying is to show your ID.
And really, you don't have to be doing anything wrong to be pulled over. When I was younger, I was in the car when my tea-totaler of a mother was pulled over on suspision of DUI. (I'll refrain from making any comments about female drivers). To be clear, her unwaivering habit of going at or below the speed limit, combined with some failed attempts to change lanes (to avoid getting rear ended by, well, anyone else on the road) caught the attention of a police car behind us. And yes, it was Sunday morning, and yes, we were on our way to church. Nothing came of it, but the point is that not breaking the law is no protection. Most states have sanctioned DUI checkpoints already. To save the children of course.
It's not what you know, it's whom. You know?
In Soviet Russia, jokes get all the Google anyone could ever want.
Arghh.. I hated switching between the C64/128 style layout and the standard PC layout.. I think I hit Shift-2 for quotation marks on a PC for years afterwards. (What the hell is this @ symbol?!?) I seem to remember some problem with the modifiers and backspace layouts as well.. not to mention the function keys.
http://www.snopes.com/cokelore/cocaine.asp
You know, this is waaaay off topic, and it's probably immoral of me to even be laughing at you instead of donating to a charitable organization that might be able to help your condition, but on the off chance that you didn't bother to read any of the article you linked to, here's the sumamry:
I'm not implying it; it's what it says flat out..
The first option is to filter the IPs at the ISP level (proxy, or whatever method they choose), the second option is to filter the IPs at the customer's workstation using software.. (commercial, 3rd party, whatever). The second option is more expensive.. it makes no sense for any standard ISP to choose option 2.
Except that they'd have to provide the software regardless of what platform the customer is using. It's far easier to just filter IPs, especially since they'd have to write a(n oh so simple) script for some customers anyway, or investigate solutions for the odd customer who's using his Commodore64.
Even if people didn't care about resolution (which is why nobody wants an HDTV, right?), the technology has several additional drawbacks.. Namely:
I understood you correctly.. what I meant to say was that there's less incentive for companies to set up more broadcast channels. It's not as if the analog spectrum is close to saturated by current VHF/UHF broadcasts. Further, the reason is not because of signal quality, but because it's cost prohibitive to set up all the necessary transmitters. With cable, it's one piece of infrastructure for all channels. Not so for broadcast, nor does cable have to vie for suitable real estate upon which to build a tower.
If the lack of available frequency spectrum were the limiting issue, then certainly I'd expect to see more channels with a switch to digital. It's simply not the biggest prohibitive factor in most markets, nor is picture quality, but rather the much higher earnings potential for cable, with it's lower cost of service and revenues from both advertisers AND viewers.
In the US, many cable providers offer digital cable already, so that wouldn't be as much of a factor. Similarly, many cable boxes also have custom PVR/DVR capabilities and offer a much broader range of channels than broadcast stations in any locale in the continental US. Among people who watch TV, just about anyone who can afford cable (any many who can't) fork out the cash rather than watching broadcast, which generally consists of 4 to 8 channels, depending on where you live. (Although the only channels I ever watch are History & Discovery.. and The Learning Channel, back before it turned into the home improvement/women's channel).
Right.. because there's certainly nothing disturbing or possibly inappropriate on Wikipedia.
/. addiction in later life.
(Those links may be considered unsafe for work, and as such I haven't verified that they work at the time of posting).
Anyway, I grew up with unfettered access to, well, BBSes back then, and the 'net in my late teens.. which proves unquestionably that giving kids free reign in what they read and view online leads to
As you say, kids will find access to it anyway.. back in the day it was kids bringing their parents/older sibling's magazines to school, today it's the internet. Not to say parents should provide material that they find inappropriate, or not show their disapproval (if it exists), but nobody should be under the illusion that there's a technical solution to shielding their children from anything they might not want them to see.. even on otherwise benign sites.
Some would argue that this is a dangerous blurring between church and state but democracy by definition is a representative government
Actually that's the definition of a republic, which is a form of democracy, but certainly not the only one.. but that's just a nitpick.
More importantly, and relevant, the Bill of Rights was established to explicitly restrict the laws that a state (or the federal government) can enact, regardless of what the majority believes, and this law is potentially violating those freedoms guaranteed under the Bill of Rights. At least, that's the case that the ACLU will certainly try to make. They will argue that the law, as written, has potential to be enforced with or without the consent of the users, which certainly seems possible from what I read.
260 (3) (a) A service provider may comply with Subsection (1) by:
261 (i) providing network-level in-network filtering to prevent receipt of material harmful to minors;
262 or
263 (ii) providing at the time of a consumer's request under Subsection (1), software for{ }
264 contemporaneous installation on the consumer's computer that blocks, in an easy-to-enable and
265 commercially reasonable manner, receipt of material harmful to minors.
It looks like option (ii) is opt-in, but option (i) is not, since it makes no mention of the consumer's request. And really, what ISP would write custom software rather than implement IP filtering?
It installed and runs just fine on my setup.. the only issue I found was when I hit the Windows key. I won't ruin the surprise for everyone, but let's just say you shouldn't press it if you're offended by profanity.