And doubleclick.net's slogan as they sell this service to advertisers: "We put your product right at your customer's fingertips."
Abuse? To say the least
on
3D Face Cameras
·
· Score: 4, Funny
"I think this may really have potential for abuse"
To say the least! The article mentioned "acquisition of accurate three-dimensional and two-dimensional human faces". It did not say photographs or images or any sort of virtual recreation. This thing must rip the face off your skull. That's gotta hurt.
Doubleclick.net/etc and others exploit IE security loopholes and deliver little click-here icon ads to your keyboard without you asking.
Or, visit a page with a banner, and watch the whole "click the monkey" or "Shoot the duck" bannergame display in your function key row, begging you to hit the right key to win that iPod.
"I think you are using a different definition of "totally free" to the popular one here. Could you define "totally free" for us so we know what is and isn't acceptable? "
I think it is pretty clear that they want to be the access point for their free stuff. They don't want others to be the access point, due to concerns that others will charge for it, alter it, place restrictions, add odd download requirements, or other odd things that strangers could do with it.
"The jury said that Stella was 20% responsible for her injuries."
Juries do silly things sometimes.
"Your insistence on a black-and-white definition of fault"
There was only one person involved with moving, de-lidding, placing, and squeezing that coffee cup. I insist on an accurate definition of fault. Whether or not it is black/white really is subjective. It is someone's fault if they do it. It is not someone's fault if they did not do it.
"indistinguishable from a claim that the 2001 terrorist attack on New York was 100% the fault of the people who built the World Trade Center."
???? That is a great leap. Is there a Godwin's law about 9-11 that I don't know about? In this off-topic example, the fault lies with those who destroyed the building, anyway.
""the basis for the defendant's liability is hard to believe" is about as subjective a definition as I can imagine"
Yes it is. That's why I mentioned the facts showing the defendent's complete lack of liability in the instance. Gets rid of the subjectivity.
"Your proof of the case being frivolous goes as follows..."
I am justified in calling you a liar here, for misquoting me. I never said anything like that in any order, let alone the bass-ackwards order you fabricated here for your straw-man.
"The only "specific[] of the case" to which you refer is that Stella spilled the coffee"
This is an important specific, yes. Interesting that you acknowledge this part proof and leave it out of your 1,2,3 strawman attack. I am not surprised: your 1,2,3 case came entirely out of the blue, and had nothing to do with anything anyone said. However, even here you are not being truthful. I have referred to the extremely low burn risk (# of burns vs # of cups sold) which proves how safe the coffee was. Another very important fact is that Stella had purchased and consumed coffee this hot from this McDonald's many times before: with no burns. That's 3 facts about the case that you left out of the "1,2,3" strawman.
" Deciding how much each party is to blame is for the jury to do, not for people who..."
It is a free country. I can decide this if I want. Anyone can. The only difference is that the jury's decision results in the government forcing its will on someone.
Thanks. After the second message where someone said this was Matrix, I looked closer. That category icon I always thought was a red-and-blue pacifier was actually Morpheus' magic beans!
"The whole point of doing the free art thing is so that we can get involved in the delivery of it as well.. if we put our stuff on someone else's server, we have zero control over it."
Have you looked into ourmedia.org? Their fine print looks to leave you in control of the stuff. You can even delete it. The problems I see with it are technical "does not work as well as it is supposed to" rather than "I give up control of my stuff".
Check into www.ourmedia.org. You might be able to just uploaded your stuff there.
It is just starting out and has problems, but if it shapes up the way they intend, it sounds like it would be perfect for you to host any of your art elsewhere with whatever licensing you want. If this works out, it would be a lot simpler, too. Certainly it would be easy to test. The worst thing I have seen is that it often takes 30+ hours for something you uploaded to be listed.
"Also, if humanity focused its efforts on a working space elevator"
Hmmm? Why not instead focus efforts on teleportation to beam stuff from planet to planet? Right now, that is hardly less feasible than a space elevator, which requires cable material no one has come anywhere close to inventing yet.
"The USPS is an awesome example of gov't appointed organization"
It is an awesome example of government incompetence, yes.
"Who else in the world can send correspondence among its citizens for only $0.37 USD???"
By "send among citizens" do you mean paying 37 cents for a letter to Grandma so it will end up instead in a bag under the porch of a postal worker too lazy to deliver the mail?
"Defense which has subsidized with taxpayer dollars the creation of violent video games"
I've about had it with these false and misleading descriptions. The only thing close violent videogames are those web web sites where you can click a mouse and shoot a living deer with a rifle halfway across the country.
Noone is ever harmed by these videogames. How can they be called violent, if no violence occurs? The games can depict violence, or simulate the look of it, but they certainly are not violent.
"A text-only web is perfectly usable at 2400bps, but uninteresting to most of the general public"
It would have worked at that speed. The page designers and web app programmers would have been forced to come up with ingenious compression routines and efficient transfer protocols. You would have ended up with a Web that would have had enough useful color graphics and "Pizzazz" to have been extremel popular with the public, even if the ability to download large files and stream intense media would have never been comparable.
With high-speed modems and broadband, it matters a lot less if the 'Net apps are kludgey and the pages are huge and sloppy.
I check Lynx every once in a while. It's not that good anymore when you get pages full of Java and script crap. Checking Lynx also can show you how unnecessary a lot of this Java and script crap is.
Remember Gopher? If not for the Netscape browser revolution, we might be still using Gopher to this day (and Google would be the top-of-the-line Archie site). Somewhere along the way, someone would have found a way to crap up Gopher with popups and scripts, no doubt.
"Do you arrest the owner of a shop that sells slim jims(tool for breaking in to cars)?"
Oh....I thought those plastic-wrapped pieces of ridiculously hot psuedo-meat at the 7-11 were for eating, but that never seem quite right. How do you use them? Do you unwrap the meat, and then set it on top of the car, and wait for it to melt a huge hole through?
Slashdot Mirror
And doubleclick.net's slogan as they sell this service to advertisers: "We put your product right at your customer's fingertips."
To say the least! The article mentioned "acquisition of accurate three-dimensional and two-dimensional human faces". It did not say photographs or images or any sort of virtual recreation. This thing must rip the face off your skull. That's gotta hurt.
It looks like you were almost trying to spell photoshop. That happens too.
Reminds me that I really need to wear that Darth Vader mask in public a lot more.
Or, visit a page with a banner, and watch the whole "click the monkey" or "Shoot the duck" bannergame display in your function key row, begging you to hit the right key to win that iPod.
How fast is the key display refresh rate? You could get some cool games on this thing in which the control AND the display is all on the keyboard.
I think it is pretty clear that they want to be the access point for their free stuff. They don't want others to be the access point, due to concerns that others will charge for it, alter it, place restrictions, add odd download requirements, or other odd things that strangers could do with it.
Juries do silly things sometimes.
"Your insistence on a black-and-white definition of fault"
There was only one person involved with moving, de-lidding, placing, and squeezing that coffee cup. I insist on an accurate definition of fault. Whether or not it is black/white really is subjective. It is someone's fault if they do it. It is not someone's fault if they did not do it.
"indistinguishable from a claim that the 2001 terrorist attack on New York was 100% the fault of the people who built the World Trade Center."
???? That is a great leap. Is there a Godwin's law about 9-11 that I don't know about? In this off-topic example, the fault lies with those who destroyed the building, anyway.
""the basis for the defendant's liability is hard to believe" is about as subjective a definition as I can imagine"
Yes it is. That's why I mentioned the facts showing the defendent's complete lack of liability in the instance. Gets rid of the subjectivity.
"Your proof of the case being frivolous goes as follows..."
I am justified in calling you a liar here, for misquoting me. I never said anything like that in any order, let alone the bass-ackwards order you fabricated here for your straw-man.
"The only "specific[] of the case" to which you refer is that Stella spilled the coffee"
This is an important specific, yes. Interesting that you acknowledge this part proof and leave it out of your 1,2,3 strawman attack. I am not surprised: your 1,2,3 case came entirely out of the blue, and had nothing to do with anything anyone said. However, even here you are not being truthful. I have referred to the extremely low burn risk (# of burns vs # of cups sold) which proves how safe the coffee was. Another very important fact is that Stella had purchased and consumed coffee this hot from this McDonald's many times before: with no burns. That's 3 facts about the case that you left out of the "1,2,3" strawman.
" Deciding how much each party is to blame is for the jury to do, not for people who..."
It is a free country. I can decide this if I want. Anyone can. The only difference is that the jury's decision results in the government forcing its will on someone.
Hmmmm. I'm now having second thoughts on ordering the clam chowder.
OK, I see where you are now. Just was thinking in the direction of a download solution much cleaner than torrent.
Don't forget: teach a man self-cannibalism, and he eats for a lifetime.
Thanks. After the second message where someone said this was Matrix, I looked closer. That category icon I always thought was a red-and-blue pacifier was actually Morpheus' magic beans!
Have you looked into ourmedia.org? Their fine print looks to leave you in control of the stuff. You can even delete it. The problems I see with it are technical "does not work as well as it is supposed to" rather than "I give up control of my stuff".
It is just starting out and has problems, but if it shapes up the way they intend, it sounds like it would be perfect for you to host any of your art elsewhere with whatever licensing you want. If this works out, it would be a lot simpler, too. Certainly it would be easy to test. The worst thing I have seen is that it often takes 30+ hours for something you uploaded to be listed.
Hmmm? Why not instead focus efforts on teleportation to beam stuff from planet to planet? Right now, that is hardly less feasible than a space elevator, which requires cable material no one has come anywhere close to inventing yet.
It is an awesome example of government incompetence, yes.
"Who else in the world can send correspondence among its citizens for only $0.37 USD???"
By "send among citizens" do you mean paying 37 cents for a letter to Grandma so it will end up instead in a bag under the porch of a postal worker too lazy to deliver the mail?
Ewww! That is much more than I wanted to know!
I've about had it with these false and misleading descriptions. The only thing close violent videogames are those web web sites where you can click a mouse and shoot a living deer with a rifle halfway across the country.
Noone is ever harmed by these videogames. How can they be called violent, if no violence occurs? The games can depict violence, or simulate the look of it, but they certainly are not violent.
It would have worked at that speed. The page designers and web app programmers would have been forced to come up with ingenious compression routines and efficient transfer protocols. You would have ended up with a Web that would have had enough useful color graphics and "Pizzazz" to have been extremel popular with the public, even if the ability to download large files and stream intense media would have never been comparable.
With high-speed modems and broadband, it matters a lot less if the 'Net apps are kludgey and the pages are huge and sloppy.
You bet! I remember the good old days when you had to rip someone's face from their skull and replace yours with it.
Remember Gopher? If not for the Netscape browser revolution, we might be still using Gopher to this day (and Google would be the top-of-the-line Archie site). Somewhere along the way, someone would have found a way to crap up Gopher with popups and scripts, no doubt.
The way this is worded, it is like you are complaining about something that happened to you at a campaign rally years back.
meanwhile, Bill works feverishly to open the sex game in GTA before Hillary puts a stop to it altogether.
Wouldn't want THIS to happen, would we?
Oh....I thought those plastic-wrapped pieces of ridiculously hot psuedo-meat at the 7-11 were for eating, but that never seem quite right. How do you use them? Do you unwrap the meat, and then set it on top of the car, and wait for it to melt a huge hole through?