Don't confuse latency (delay) with thru-put (avg bytes per second). Anyways, most USB-serial devices are CDC 1.1 or basically equivalent, and only full-speed at best (I have yet to see a high-speed USB-serial device). This means bulk transactions of 64 bytes each, so the host/driver/device has to deal with a pretty high interrupt rate to get the theoretical maximum. Long or poorly-shielded cables can also have a detrimental effect as bulk transfers are checksummed and assured delivery, so line noise causes the stream to stall and retry (unlike RS232). Bulk transactions also have the lowest priority on the bus so it should be expected that performance drops rapidly when other devices are present.
There is no such thing as 79% of a dollar... what are you gonna do, cut one up? That is illegal. However, you can have 79 cents, which just happens to also have a value that is 79% of the value of a dollar.
Besides, the image of California getting a big pile of pennies and assorted change every time someone sends a dollar to the Feds just seems sort of warm and happy. Ahh, change. Can ya spare some?
It isn't much of a box, really, as 440 is just one number in use. It used to be more like 435. And, its not really even 440 any more as many orchestras tune to 442, some up as high as 445. (being a bit "sharp" makes the music sound a bit more lively).
Which brings us back to TFA -- the research in the article finds that because of this ever-sharpening of A 440, people with perfect pitch are more likely to confuse A and A# and G / G# than any other pair of notes. That is actually pretty interesting because no one has managed to show before that there is some kind of systematic degradation in the perfect pitch ability.
Actually, the law doesn't require that you insure your *car*, it requires that you insure yourself for the liability created by driving. If you want to put your money where your mouth is, call up your insurance agent next week and drop your collision coverage. You should save a decent chunk of change if you do that...
As for the health-care issue I would ask if you have ever been to a third world country? Because what you can see there is horrific -- crushed limbs, untreated knife wounds, infections out of control... I for one am glad that here in America the emergency room is open to all, because I don't want to feel queasy when I pass people in the street. The reason people don't try to explain why this is important is because if you have ever seen what its like the other way, its obvious.
Libertarianism is founded on a particular flavor of logical extremism, the mathematical superiority (i.e. total consistency) of which may be a natural attraction to brainy types. Actually, it is *not* unique in this claim, as its political opposite (i.e. pure socialism) also has the same property. However, its diametric opposite isn't a very successful ideology for survival, so it doesn't attract many followers. Libertarianism may also encourage a type of myopic world-view that introverted people find comfortable, although I don't think this is a particularly positive way to go about ones' life.
This is just one in a long series of "quality" ranking algorithms based on analysis of information networks. The next logical step is a meta-algorithm that ranks the quality of quality ranking algorithms.Metrics will include vulnerability to attack / manipulation, bias or skewness of results, logical consistency of quality estimation, logical / semantic consistency of content judged to be trusted or coherent, and reaction time to incorporation of new information. Its only a matter of time before some poor PhD student spends their lonely years coding it.
RTFA. He calls the _book_ "crackpottery" (see below) but doesn't say anything detrimental about the author's personal character. Actually he doesn't really say much about the author at all, except for a brief mention of some other organizations that he is affiliated with (e.g. various creationist types). Actually the review itself is remarkably favorable considering the absurdity of the content.
Furthermore, if you read the review it is clear that the reviewer is actually interested in something *similar* to Pivar's theory, namely what he calls developmental structuralism, which is an actual topic of academic research in developmental / structural biology. This is to say that a person who clearly has some skills and interesting ideas isn't necessarily a crackpot, but may tend to produce crackpottery when left to their own ends, working in the dark, possibly egged on by other parties with a vested interest in creating diversion, and without connection to any established research in the field. Going off into the deep end and making a leap of faith is actually a great thing -- just not so great when its a thousand miles off shore.
"""I have to add another compliment for the book, though. In addition to the lovely artwork, it's an extremely high quality print; well bound, on heavy stock, and looking to last a thousand years. It seems no expense was spared getting it published, which is in contrast to the content, and is unusual for such flagrant crackpottery."""
Any machine can be a vector -- whatever form, intentional or otherwise -- a dumb virus, a buggy app, a faulty NIC, or a clever hacker with a USB drive. Nobody in their right mind expects a computer with MSIE running in kiosk mode to be tamper proof. Sure, the kiosk could have been more secure, but even so that is only the first line of defense. The real problem was the connection from the kiosk straight into the corporate intranet, which is an absurd transgression to even the most basic security policy -- don't grant more access than is needed. 30% of buglaries are not forced entry... clearly these guys didn't even know how to shut the door.
Insecure kiosks, open connections to the internal network, insecure wireless networks, and insufficient access logs to figure out what happened later -- I'm not sure what to make of the false PIN entry devices but clearly TXJ didn't have an effective policy in place for network ops.
Diebold obtained the voting system through an acquisition. The system was created from the ground up by a completely different team, and thus no connection to the ATM guys. In fact many of the transgressions had already taken place at the time of buyout, it just was not well known yet.
Independent review (of the leaked source code) concluded that the code base was of shockingly low quality, lacking in many basic principles of secure and defensive design, most likely written by programmers with very little training. Unfortunately this didn't stop it from being election-ready certified, which I imagine is where the real value was for Diebold.
Unfortunately, as any decent coder knows, a huge mess of spaghetti code is nearly impossible to fix short of a complete rewrite, which is probably why the system hasn't gotten any better since then.
Disputing use of the word "lie" is just semantic bickering, it dodges the real issue over what he said.
Consider this; a rumor is "going around", and there is absolutely *zero* factual evidence to support it (and, absurdly enough, later investigation finds the exact converse to be true), and yet he is "inclined to believe" that it is true. Interesting, that. Inclined to believe on what basis? Was this rumor leaked from a secret source inside NASA that he trusts? Nope, its just "going around".
Ultimately he doesn't say what his reason is, but it is implied in the subtext if you read carefully -- if the rumor were true it would make the EPA look "stupid" for having banned freon. Limbaugh is "inclined to believe" the rumor because it supports his position on the EPA.
Now technically he didn't lie about anything, and no one is going to jail for being "inclined to believe" a baseless assertion. On the other hand, we can hardly award him for his outstanding journalism. Just like all the other loose nuts his approach to fact-finding is totally anti-scientific. His conclusion on the EPA is foregone; he does no real investigation, and no fact-checking -- he simply trumpets anything he can find that supports his theory. I don't care if his theory about the EPA is right or wrong because even if he is right, it is by coincidence alone as his methods are so flawed as to make his entire effort meaningless.
Just for the record the MBP trackpad isn't really multitouch in the general sense -- it is twotouch, which just a variation on the standard resistor ladder circuit used in sensing single touch. Multitouch requires a big array of sensors.
Various animals (squirrels, birds) hide food in order to survive the winter. If the privacy of their hiding places is compromised, they die.
The same applies to some aspects of modern life-- e.g., products of human intellectual activity (e.g. most white-collar type work and its products) benefit (i.e. retain economic value) from some degree of privacy. A consultant's list of clients, or a dealers wholesale price, is perhaps as important as the squirrels cache of nuts. There may also be a situation where knowledge of sexual relations (or even existence & location of compatible individuals) may be crucial to genetic survival of the individual.
The biological source of the instinct to hide certain valuable things seems, to me, intuitive.
Actually the US mail system is regulated by a number of laws pertaining to unsolicited mail. Not all junk is legal. Mail fraud is an obvious one, and much of e-mail spam is fraudulent. The Deceptive Mail Prevention and Enforcement Act requires that junk mail properly identifies the sender. By the Fair Credit Reporting Act you have the right to opt-out of credit card offers. And the distribution of private information to 3rd parties for mailing lists is regulated by various state-level civil codes.
"...there are at least two ways in which he has benefited mathematics: he has helped to popularize a relatively little-known mathematical area (CA theory), and he has unwittingly provided several highly instructive examples of the pitfalls of trying to dispense with mathematical rigor." (Lawrence Gray, "A Mathematician Looks at Wolfram's New Kind Of Science).
I give credit to the author for a fair evaluation, but I wouldn't exactly call it a favorable review.
If Wolfram wrote "A Pictoral Introduction to Cellular Automata", and left out the hundreds of pages of self-aggrandizing nonsense, it would be factual, useful and no one would complain.
"Miles per gallon" isn't a linear scale with respect to efficiency of the vehicle, and its misleading to the public who don't realize that the difference between 10-13 MPG is three times larger than the difference between 30-33 MPG.
"Gallons per mile" is the correct unit for what the customer needs to know, and better still would be an estimated cost of gasoline per year under typical driving conditions and pounds of greenhouse gases expelled.
Until the EPA fixes this misleading system we can only conclude that they don't really have the customer's best interest in mind.
Depends on how the final surface quality, and we have yet to see what that will be. I think it is possible to finish the surface with some sort of oil-resistant plastic. Somehow the current stock of touchscreen monitors actually hold up fairly well with respect to finger goo. The current iPod finishes on the other hand... unbelievably gross.
From a purely technological standpoint, multi-touch is nothing really special, in fact the exact same materials that make a single-touch screen are used to make multi-touch screens also. (The JazzMutant Lemur is a good example, which I've used before and its quite a lot of fun). The main reason it isn't widely available already is cost -- multi-touch requires lots more ADCs and that means a lot of extra pins and wiring to support the parallel scanning of the sensor array.
At the very least Apple did acquire a formidable patent portfolio from Fingerworks. Especially in the area of gestures and so on. A few of these might actually be non-obvious because it really is a new paradigm for interaction. Expect Apple to be aggressively protecting their IP in this area going forward.
In this case the perp was probably none too bright-- when I was that age, everyone I knew with a fake ID had a fake name on it, too. The risk of false accusation is high, and "ammending the blog" won't get her out of a lawsuit if the accuser seeks compensation for damages.
The bottom line is that until there is an arrest, proper collection of evidence, and the the perp found guilty in a court of law, her evidence is inconclusive. Even then, there are laws regarding what information can be disclosed -- for example in most places it is illegal to publish the name of a minor in connection with a crime. She is trying to do justice without any of the resources, training or understanding of due process that the US legal system employs.
FWIW, there is a clause in defamation law ("conditional privilege") that allows her to make these unconfirmed accusations about her patrons -- however only in the case that the statement is is for legitimate business purposes and insofar as the statement is only made to a restricted audience of interested business parties (e.g., typically used for personal references). That would allow her to share the fake IDs, photos and names with the bar down the street, but not the entire world. Limiting the exposure of information to an as-needed basis is the first line of defense against a defamation claim.
There are training courses for learning how to spot fake IDs and resources commonly available, like books of license templates from all 50 states. Her website is not a substitute for proper training and consistent enforcement policies and her intentions, regardless of how good, don't excuse her from the law.
"protection for a work employing preexisting material in which copyright subsists does not extend to any part of the work in which such material has been used unlawfully."
This relates to lawful right to use the source material in the derivative, *not* the use of the derivative in an unlawful manner (intent to defraud). This clause is there to close a rather obvious loophole that would otherwise allow anyone to copyright derivative works of originals with trivial changes.
Even if the person in question did not have the rights to use the license design / background, then copyright does not extend to the derivative work as a whole (per this section). However, if they did have the rights to the photo used in the first place, the photo in particular still retains those rights.
Yes but it is a *fake* ID. It does not identify the holder, therefore it is ineffective for vigilante justice, and furthermore could be stolen, leading to false accusations and future problems for the true owner. There is no moral high ground for making false accusations.
Last I checked the cops don't post pictures of the evidence they confiscate online. And I'm pretty sure that if they did, there would be a some nasty lawsuits (libel / slander / false accusations... and yes, copyright too). Oh and the cops also lose their job if they don't confiscate that stuff, but we don't see them whining about it on their blogs.
Meh. I thought her commentary was on the bitter and pointless side. And disparaging someone in your blog isn't acceptable in my book unless its a public dispute.
Slashdot Mirror
Don't confuse latency (delay) with thru-put (avg bytes per second). Anyways, most USB-serial devices are CDC 1.1 or basically equivalent, and only full-speed at best (I have yet to see a high-speed USB-serial device). This means bulk transactions of 64 bytes each, so the host/driver/device has to deal with a pretty high interrupt rate to get the theoretical maximum. Long or poorly-shielded cables can also have a detrimental effect as bulk transfers are checksummed and assured delivery, so line noise causes the stream to stall and retry (unlike RS232). Bulk transactions also have the lowest priority on the bus so it should be expected that performance drops rapidly when other devices are present.
No, that isn't necessary assuming you've drained all the water and replaced it with oil.
There is no such thing as 79% of a dollar... what are you gonna do, cut one up? That is illegal. However, you can have 79 cents, which just happens to also have a value that is 79% of the value of a dollar.
Besides, the image of California getting a big pile of pennies and assorted change every time someone sends a dollar to the Feds just seems sort of warm and happy. Ahh, change. Can ya spare some?
It isn't much of a box, really, as 440 is just one number in use. It used to be more like 435. And, its not really even 440 any more as many orchestras tune to 442, some up as high as 445. (being a bit "sharp" makes the music sound a bit more lively).
Which brings us back to TFA -- the research in the article finds that because of this ever-sharpening of A 440, people with perfect pitch are more likely to confuse A and A# and G / G# than any other pair of notes. That is actually pretty interesting because no one has managed to show before that there is some kind of systematic degradation in the perfect pitch ability.
Actually, the law doesn't require that you insure your *car*, it requires that you insure yourself for the liability created by driving. If you want to put your money where your mouth is, call up your insurance agent next week and drop your collision coverage. You should save a decent chunk of change if you do that...
As for the health-care issue I would ask if you have ever been to a third world country? Because what you can see there is horrific -- crushed limbs, untreated knife wounds, infections out of control... I for one am glad that here in America the emergency room is open to all, because I don't want to feel queasy when I pass people in the street. The reason people don't try to explain why this is important is because if you have ever seen what its like the other way, its obvious.
Libertarianism is founded on a particular flavor of logical extremism, the mathematical superiority (i.e. total consistency) of which may be a natural attraction to brainy types. Actually, it is *not* unique in this claim, as its political opposite (i.e. pure socialism) also has the same property. However, its diametric opposite isn't a very successful ideology for survival, so it doesn't attract many followers. Libertarianism may also encourage a type of myopic world-view that introverted people find comfortable, although I don't think this is a particularly positive way to go about ones' life.
This is just one in a long series of "quality" ranking algorithms based on analysis of information networks. The next logical step is a meta-algorithm that ranks the quality of quality ranking algorithms.Metrics will include vulnerability to attack / manipulation, bias or skewness of results, logical consistency of quality estimation, logical / semantic consistency of content judged to be trusted or coherent, and reaction time to incorporation of new information. Its only a matter of time before some poor PhD student spends their lonely years coding it.
I always pee in the bushes when tripping balls...
RTFA. He calls the _book_ "crackpottery" (see below) but doesn't say anything detrimental about the author's personal character. Actually he doesn't really say much about the author at all, except for a brief mention of some other organizations that he is affiliated with (e.g. various creationist types). Actually the review itself is remarkably favorable considering the absurdity of the content.
Furthermore, if you read the review it is clear that the reviewer is actually interested in something *similar* to Pivar's theory, namely what he calls developmental structuralism, which is an actual topic of academic research in developmental / structural biology. This is to say that a person who clearly has some skills and interesting ideas isn't necessarily a crackpot, but may tend to produce crackpottery when left to their own ends, working in the dark, possibly egged on by other parties with a vested interest in creating diversion, and without connection to any established research in the field. Going off into the deep end and making a leap of faith is actually a great thing -- just not so great when its a thousand miles off shore.
"""I have to add another compliment for the book, though. In addition to the lovely artwork, it's an extremely high quality print; well bound, on heavy stock, and looking to last a thousand years. It seems no expense was spared getting it published, which is in contrast to the content, and is unusual for such flagrant crackpottery."""
Any machine can be a vector -- whatever form, intentional or otherwise -- a dumb virus, a buggy app, a faulty NIC, or a clever hacker with a USB drive. Nobody in their right mind expects a computer with MSIE running in kiosk mode to be tamper proof. Sure, the kiosk could have been more secure, but even so that is only the first line of defense. The real problem was the connection from the kiosk straight into the corporate intranet, which is an absurd transgression to even the most basic security policy -- don't grant more access than is needed. 30% of buglaries are not forced entry... clearly these guys didn't even know how to shut the door.
Insecure kiosks, open connections to the internal network, insecure wireless networks, and insufficient access logs to figure out what happened later -- I'm not sure what to make of the false PIN entry devices but clearly TXJ didn't have an effective policy in place for network ops.
Diebold obtained the voting system through an acquisition. The system was created from the ground up by a completely different team, and thus no connection to the ATM guys. In fact many of the transgressions had already taken place at the time of buyout, it just was not well known yet.
Independent review (of the leaked source code) concluded that the code base was of shockingly low quality, lacking in many basic principles of secure and defensive design, most likely written by programmers with very little training. Unfortunately this didn't stop it from being election-ready certified, which I imagine is where the real value was for Diebold.
Unfortunately, as any decent coder knows, a huge mess of spaghetti code is nearly impossible to fix short of a complete rewrite, which is probably why the system hasn't gotten any better since then.
Disputing use of the word "lie" is just semantic bickering, it dodges the real issue over what he said.
Consider this; a rumor is "going around", and there is absolutely *zero* factual evidence to support it (and, absurdly enough, later investigation finds the exact converse to be true), and yet he is "inclined to believe" that it is true. Interesting, that. Inclined to believe on what basis? Was this rumor leaked from a secret source inside NASA that he trusts? Nope, its just "going around".
Ultimately he doesn't say what his reason is, but it is implied in the subtext if you read carefully -- if the rumor were true it would make the EPA look "stupid" for having banned freon. Limbaugh is "inclined to believe" the rumor because it supports his position on the EPA.
Now technically he didn't lie about anything, and no one is going to jail for being "inclined to believe" a baseless assertion. On the other hand, we can hardly award him for his outstanding journalism. Just like all the other loose nuts his approach to fact-finding is totally anti-scientific. His conclusion on the EPA is foregone; he does no real investigation, and no fact-checking -- he simply trumpets anything he can find that supports his theory. I don't care if his theory about the EPA is right or wrong because even if he is right, it is by coincidence alone as his methods are so flawed as to make his entire effort meaningless.
Just for the record the MBP trackpad isn't really multitouch in the general sense -- it is twotouch, which just a variation on the standard resistor ladder circuit used in sensing single touch. Multitouch requires a big array of sensors.
Various animals (squirrels, birds) hide food in order to survive the winter. If the privacy of their hiding places is compromised, they die.
The same applies to some aspects of modern life-- e.g., products of human intellectual activity (e.g. most white-collar type work and its products) benefit (i.e. retain economic value) from some degree of privacy. A consultant's list of clients, or a dealers wholesale price, is perhaps as important as the squirrels cache of nuts. There may also be a situation where knowledge of sexual relations (or even existence & location of compatible individuals) may be crucial to genetic survival of the individual.
The biological source of the instinct to hide certain valuable things seems, to me, intuitive.
Actually the US mail system is regulated by a number of laws pertaining to unsolicited mail. Not all junk is legal. Mail fraud is an obvious one, and much of e-mail spam is fraudulent. The Deceptive Mail Prevention and Enforcement Act requires that junk mail properly identifies the sender. By the Fair Credit Reporting Act you have the right to opt-out of credit card offers. And the distribution of private information to 3rd parties for mailing lists is regulated by various state-level civil codes.
But if the seat's on fire, perhaps you should piss on it.
Not if its an electrical fire.
From the article:
"...there are at least two ways in which
he has benefited mathematics: he has helped to
popularize a relatively little-known mathematical
area (CA theory), and he has unwittingly provided
several highly instructive examples of the pitfalls
of trying to dispense with mathematical rigor."
(Lawrence Gray, "A Mathematician Looks at Wolfram's New Kind Of Science).
I give credit to the author for a fair evaluation, but I wouldn't exactly call it a favorable review.
If Wolfram wrote "A Pictoral Introduction to Cellular Automata", and left out the hundreds of pages of self-aggrandizing nonsense, it would be factual, useful and no one would complain.
The whole American society might collapse under the weight of it all.
Precisely.
"Miles per gallon" isn't a linear scale with respect to efficiency of the vehicle, and its misleading to the public who don't realize that the difference between 10-13 MPG is three times larger than the difference between 30-33 MPG.
"Gallons per mile" is the correct unit for what the customer needs to know, and better still would be an estimated cost of gasoline per year under typical driving conditions and pounds of greenhouse gases expelled.
Until the EPA fixes this misleading system we can only conclude that they don't really have the customer's best interest in mind.
Depends on how the final surface quality, and we have yet to see what that will be. I think it is possible to finish the surface with some sort of oil-resistant plastic. Somehow the current stock of touchscreen monitors actually hold up fairly well with respect to finger goo. The current iPod finishes on the other hand... unbelievably gross.
From a purely technological standpoint, multi-touch is nothing really special, in fact the exact same materials that make a single-touch screen are used to make multi-touch screens also. (The JazzMutant Lemur is a good example, which I've used before and its quite a lot of fun). The main reason it isn't widely available already is cost -- multi-touch requires lots more ADCs and that means a lot of extra pins and wiring to support the parallel scanning of the sensor array.
At the very least Apple did acquire a formidable patent portfolio from Fingerworks. Especially in the area of gestures and so on. A few of these might actually be non-obvious because it really is a new paradigm for interaction. Expect Apple to be aggressively protecting their IP in this area going forward.
In this case the perp was probably none too bright-- when I was that age, everyone I knew with a fake ID had a fake name on it, too. The risk of false accusation is high, and "ammending the blog" won't get her out of a lawsuit if the accuser seeks compensation for damages.
The bottom line is that until there is an arrest, proper collection of evidence, and the the perp found guilty in a court of law, her evidence is inconclusive. Even then, there are laws regarding what information can be disclosed -- for example in most places it is illegal to publish the name of a minor in connection with a crime. She is trying to do justice without any of the resources, training or understanding of due process that the US legal system employs.
FWIW, there is a clause in defamation law ("conditional privilege") that allows her to make these unconfirmed accusations about her patrons -- however only in the case that the statement is is for legitimate business purposes and insofar as the statement is only made to a restricted audience of interested business parties (e.g., typically used for personal references). That would allow her to share the fake IDs, photos and names with the bar down the street, but not the entire world. Limiting the exposure of information to an as-needed basis is the first line of defense against a defamation claim.
There are training courses for learning how to spot fake IDs and resources commonly available, like books of license templates from all 50 states. Her website is not a substitute for proper training and consistent enforcement policies and her intentions, regardless of how good, don't excuse her from the law.
I think you are reading this section wrong:
"protection for a work employing preexisting material in which copyright subsists does not extend to any part of the work in which such material has been used unlawfully."
This relates to lawful right to use the source material in the derivative, *not* the use of the derivative in an unlawful manner (intent to defraud). This clause is there to close a rather obvious loophole that would otherwise allow anyone to copyright derivative works of originals with trivial changes.
Even if the person in question did not have the rights to use the license design / background, then copyright does not extend to the derivative work as a whole (per this section). However, if they did have the rights to the photo used in the first place, the photo in particular still retains those rights.
Yes but it is a *fake* ID. It does not identify the holder, therefore it is ineffective for vigilante justice, and furthermore could be stolen, leading to false accusations and future problems for the true owner. There is no moral high ground for making false accusations.
Last I checked the cops don't post pictures of the evidence they confiscate online. And I'm pretty sure that if they did, there would be a some nasty lawsuits (libel / slander / false accusations... and yes, copyright too). Oh and the cops also lose their job if they don't confiscate that stuff, but we don't see them whining about it on their blogs.
Meh. I thought her commentary was on the bitter and pointless side. And disparaging someone in your blog isn't acceptable in my book unless its a public dispute.