Uh, no. Nobody uses the Unreal Engine or the Source Engine to model diffusion and fluid flow. This is a field I work in professionally and academically, and you'd be a laughing stock if you seriously suggested taking this route. There is an enormous difference between a game engine which is designed to make things look good, and an accurate physical simulator.
Furthermore, the underlying software already exists, academically and commercially, with 6 figure licensing fees, which is good because developing a simulator and validating it would take months, as the GP said. The challenge isn't writing the code, it's building an accurate model.
Since Vista, Microsoft have been moving most drivers back into userspace. In Vista and Win7, display drivers are hybrids: they contain a small kernel space (ring 0) driver that handles direct communication with the graphics device (i.e., scheduling DMA operations and such), and a user space (ring 3) driver that does all the heavy work.
That's why, even in the early days of Vista when the drivers were terrible, it didn't actually blue-screen much. You'd get a screen flicker then a message informing you that the driver crashed and Windows had restarted it.
A simple Google search shows that the US unanimously ratified the treaty 4 years ago, and has extradited more people to the UK under its terms than the UK has to America.
Measure the conductance of the object in contact with the blade at varying frequencies. Tissue has different electrical properties from most things robots work with. Unless they're in a meat packing plant.
The Sherman Act has two sections. Section II deals with monopolies and monopolistic behavior. Section I deals with anti-competitive behavior, and you most certainly don't have to be a monopoly to run afoul of it.
Indeed it has full support for Flash and Silverlight in the Windows Mobile version. However if you've ever used it substantially, it becomes apparent that the backend for WinMo is basically implemented using screen-scraping. The Skyfire client is basically just a clever image viewer.
From the sound of it they're implementing something more advanced (probably their own WebKit derived renderer) for the Android backend. Although I wonder if they're still delivering images, or just sending a special markup like Opera does with its Mini browser.
The law doesn't require you to make every effort, only a reasonable effort. If I find your wallet with your phone number in it, and I call you several times to return it and you don't do anything about it... I've made a reasonable effort. I don't need to drive 20 miles to your house to drop it off, because you can't be bothered. Calling on several occasions is a reasonable effort.
Apple new the phone was missing, they bricked it the very next day. They could have told their phone staff what to do if someone called in regarding it, but they didn't. They fucked up once by leaving it in a bar, and they fucked up a second time by not dealing with it when the finder called.
Lost property is dealt with under both civil and criminal statutes in California. Gizmodo and the original finder may be in violation of California's civil code, but that has absolutely nothing to do with the criminal code, and whether what they did is illegal (in the felonious sense). The criminal code only requires a 'reasonable and just' effort be made. Violating the civil code might open up Giz and the finder to a lawsuit, but given that the property has already been returned that probably wouldn't go very far.
No, you're very wrong. Lost property is dealt with under both civil and criminal statutes. Selling someone else's lost property is only illegal if you don't make a 'reasonable and just' effort to return it to the original owner. Criminal law on the subject makes absolutely no reference to the police.
Civil statutes are much stricter than criminal, but violating them doesn't mean you've done something illegal. It just means Apple can sue for remedy and restitution, i.e. the return of their lost property. Which has already happened.
This is why non-lawyers shouldn't discuss legal topics. They invariably get things wrong.
Police don't get involved in civil matters, and the penal code only requires a 'reasonable and just effort.' Gizmodo claims Apple was contacted a number of times, and there's been no suggestion that they're lying. Calling the company up and offering to return the phone is a reasonable and just effort. Thus, there was no theft.
Perhaps what Giz did was actionable under civil law, but that's up to Apple, not the police. And given that the phone was returned promptly by Gizmodo, it's unlikely that would last long in court either; civil actions are primarily for remedy, not damages.
Jennifer Granick, civil liberties director for the Electronic Frontier Foundation, said Chen is protected from a warrant by both state and federal laws.
The federal Privacy Protection Act prohibits the government from seizing materials from journalists and others who possess material for the purpose of communicating to the public. The government cannot seize material from the journalist even if it’s investigating whether the person who possesses the material committed a crime.
Instead, investigators need to obtain a subpoena, which would allow the reporter or media outlet to challenge the request and segregate information that is not relevant to the investigation.
“Congress was contemplating a situation where someone might claim that the journalist was committing a crime [in order to seize materials from them],” Granick says.
California state law also provides protections to prevent journalists from being forced to disclose sources or unpublished information related to their work.
“California law is crystal clear that bloggers are journalists, too,” she says.
Apple is on the steering committee for the REACT task force that raided Chen’s house. Formed in 1997, REACT is a partnership of 17 local, state and federal agencies tasked with investigating computer- and internet-related crimes.
I'm surprised you yanks get so fussed about the occasional friendly fire incident. Because you guys are just so damned good at it.
The UK has had trouble calling the US its ally since Operation Telic, or since the US military shot down a Tornado fighter, or when a US gunship opened fire on British and Afghan Army infantry, or when an American fighter bombed a British Regiment, or when American tanks opened fire on a British recon vehicles. Or when a British armor unit was destroyed by American A-10s...
Shall we move onto your other "allies?" Are you getting my point? Americans are in no position to complain about friendly fire incidents.
You misunderstand my point about inefficiency. My point is that the American approach puts the brightest people building tools to enable others to accomplish many tasks with less resources. You can do your design work more quickly with fewer engineers by relying on numerical approximations, enabled by clever software and hardware.
Perhaps you don't realize this, but there were two Iraq invasions. The Gulf War refers to the one in 1990, and Iraq was NOT under embargo leading up to that invasion.
You may say that Norway bases its welfare state on taxes, but you're a country the size of Kentucky taxing 100 billion dollars a year of energy revenue, on top of everything else. The Norwegian government has done many good things over the past 20 years. But suggesting that its economic strength and stability are solely due to wise economic planning is disingenuous at best. Norway's oil wealth doesn't hurt Norway's economy in the same way that Bill Gates' fortune doesn't hurt his chances of a comfortable retirement.
One of the main serious uses of computing, especially in the cold war, was solving partial differential equations. Whether these be for orbital calculations, stability analysis, EM simulation, etc..., solving partial differential equations is a critical part of any advanced engineering program.
The American approach really started in the 50s with the advent of programmable computers, and is very stereotypical: just find a decent approximation. Modern western engineering is all about using pretty advanced computers to find arbitrary numerical approximations to tricky PDEs. It's reached its culmination in modern engineering design, where most advanced products are designed and simulated in computers, and prototyping only occurs at the very end of the process.
The Soviets had computers.... some home built, some Western, but generally speaking they weren't very good. The Soviet approach was also very stereotypical: get an army of mathematicians and engineers to find exact analytic solutions to the problems you're trying to solve. You'd have armies of engineers and technicians designing things that in the west we'd give to a couple of engineers with some computer time.
The end result is that some Soviet engineering is stunningly brilliant. And a lot is absolute crap. One of the reasons the west won the cold war is that we were just much better at solving partial differential equations. This report is unsurprising... the Soviet approach just seems so stupid to any Western engineer unfamiliar with it, that you'd have to assume they had some magic trick up their sleeve. But nope, just a lot of brainpower misdirected into a lot of horribly inefficient pursuits.
Slashdot Mirror
Sign up for an 40+ singles cruise?
Uh, no. Nobody uses the Unreal Engine or the Source Engine to model diffusion and fluid flow. This is a field I work in professionally and academically, and you'd be a laughing stock if you seriously suggested taking this route. There is an enormous difference between a game engine which is designed to make things look good, and an accurate physical simulator.
Furthermore, the underlying software already exists, academically and commercially, with 6 figure licensing fees, which is good because developing a simulator and validating it would take months, as the GP said. The challenge isn't writing the code, it's building an accurate model.
Since Vista, Microsoft have been moving most drivers back into userspace. In Vista and Win7, display drivers are hybrids: they contain a small kernel space (ring 0) driver that handles direct communication with the graphics device (i.e., scheduling DMA operations and such), and a user space (ring 3) driver that does all the heavy work.
That's why, even in the early days of Vista when the drivers were terrible, it didn't actually blue-screen much. You'd get a screen flicker then a message informing you that the driver crashed and Windows had restarted it.
A simple Google search shows that the US unanimously ratified the treaty 4 years ago, and has extradited more people to the UK under its terms than the UK has to America.
Sorry to ruin your talking point.
Measure the conductance of the object in contact with the blade at varying frequencies. Tissue has different electrical properties from most things robots work with. Unless they're in a meat packing plant.
The Sherman Act has two sections. Section II deals with monopolies and monopolistic behavior. Section I deals with anti-competitive behavior, and you most certainly don't have to be a monopoly to run afoul of it.
Indeed it has full support for Flash and Silverlight in the Windows Mobile version. However if you've ever used it substantially, it becomes apparent that the backend for WinMo is basically implemented using screen-scraping. The Skyfire client is basically just a clever image viewer.
From the sound of it they're implementing something more advanced (probably their own WebKit derived renderer) for the Android backend. Although I wonder if they're still delivering images, or just sending a special markup like Opera does with its Mini browser.
No, it doesn't. You're thinking of the civil statute, which is completely different and has absolutely no bearing on whether the action was felonious.
No, you don't. Look up the difference between civil and criminal statutes. Giving it to the cops is a civil requirement, not a criminal one.
s/new/knew/
The law doesn't require you to make every effort, only a reasonable effort. If I find your wallet with your phone number in it, and I call you several times to return it and you don't do anything about it... I've made a reasonable effort. I don't need to drive 20 miles to your house to drop it off, because you can't be bothered. Calling on several occasions is a reasonable effort.
Apple new the phone was missing, they bricked it the very next day. They could have told their phone staff what to do if someone called in regarding it, but they didn't. They fucked up once by leaving it in a bar, and they fucked up a second time by not dealing with it when the finder called.
That is the civil code
Lost property is dealt with under both civil and criminal statutes in California. Gizmodo and the original finder may be in violation of California's civil code, but that has absolutely nothing to do with the criminal code, and whether what they did is illegal (in the felonious sense). The criminal code only requires a 'reasonable and just' effort be made. Violating the civil code might open up Giz and the finder to a lawsuit, but given that the property has already been returned that probably wouldn't go very far.
No, you're very wrong. Lost property is dealt with under both civil and criminal statutes. Selling someone else's lost property is only illegal if you don't make a 'reasonable and just' effort to return it to the original owner. Criminal law on the subject makes absolutely no reference to the police.
Civil statutes are much stricter than criminal, but violating them doesn't mean you've done something illegal. It just means Apple can sue for remedy and restitution, i.e. the return of their lost property. Which has already happened.
This is why non-lawyers shouldn't discuss legal topics. They invariably get things wrong.
Police don't get involved in civil matters, and the penal code only requires a 'reasonable and just effort.' Gizmodo claims Apple was contacted a number of times, and there's been no suggestion that they're lying. Calling the company up and offering to return the phone is a reasonable and just effort. Thus, there was no theft.
Perhaps what Giz did was actionable under civil law, but that's up to Apple, not the police. And given that the phone was returned promptly by Gizmodo, it's unlikely that would last long in court either; civil actions are primarily for remedy, not damages.
The EFF disagrees with you:
Jennifer Granick, civil liberties director for the Electronic Frontier Foundation, said Chen is protected from a warrant by both state and federal laws.
The federal Privacy Protection Act prohibits the government from seizing materials from journalists and others who possess material for the purpose of communicating to the public. The government cannot seize material from the journalist even if it’s investigating whether the person who possesses the material committed a crime.
Instead, investigators need to obtain a subpoena, which would allow the reporter or media outlet to challenge the request and segregate information that is not relevant to the investigation.
“Congress was contemplating a situation where someone might claim that the journalist was committing a crime [in order to seize materials from them],” Granick says.
California state law also provides protections to prevent journalists from being forced to disclose sources or unpublished information related to their work.
“California law is crystal clear that bloggers are journalists, too,” she says.
Apple is on the steering committee for the REACT task force that raided Chen’s house. Formed in 1997, REACT is a partnership of 17 local, state and federal agencies tasked with investigating computer- and internet-related crimes.
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/04/iphone-raid/
Actually I was wrong. Disregard that.
Actually, no. The law on the subject makes no reference to the police, and the police are not obliged to serve as a giant lost+found service.
I'm surprised you yanks get so fussed about the occasional friendly fire incident. Because you guys are just so damned good at it.
The UK has had trouble calling the US its ally since Operation Telic, or since the US military shot down a Tornado fighter, or when a US gunship opened fire on British and Afghan Army infantry, or when an American fighter bombed a British Regiment, or when American tanks opened fire on a British recon vehicles. Or when a British armor unit was destroyed by American A-10s...
Shall we move onto your other "allies?" Are you getting my point? Americans are in no position to complain about friendly fire incidents.
They took something from us that they had no grounds to
The eighteenth amendment has something to say about that.
Well you know what the nation of Israel is like, they're always initially suspicious of new tablets. But they come around in the end.
You misunderstand my point about inefficiency. My point is that the American approach puts the brightest people building tools to enable others to accomplish many tasks with less resources. You can do your design work more quickly with fewer engineers by relying on numerical approximations, enabled by clever software and hardware.
Perhaps you don't realize this, but there were two Iraq invasions. The Gulf War refers to the one in 1990, and Iraq was NOT under embargo leading up to that invasion.
You may say that Norway bases its welfare state on taxes, but you're a country the size of Kentucky taxing 100 billion dollars a year of energy revenue, on top of everything else. The Norwegian government has done many good things over the past 20 years. But suggesting that its economic strength and stability are solely due to wise economic planning is disingenuous at best. Norway's oil wealth doesn't hurt Norway's economy in the same way that Bill Gates' fortune doesn't hurt his chances of a comfortable retirement.
One of the main serious uses of computing, especially in the cold war, was solving partial differential equations. Whether these be for orbital calculations, stability analysis, EM simulation, etc..., solving partial differential equations is a critical part of any advanced engineering program.
The American approach really started in the 50s with the advent of programmable computers, and is very stereotypical: just find a decent approximation. Modern western engineering is all about using pretty advanced computers to find arbitrary numerical approximations to tricky PDEs. It's reached its culmination in modern engineering design, where most advanced products are designed and simulated in computers, and prototyping only occurs at the very end of the process.
The Soviets had computers.... some home built, some Western, but generally speaking they weren't very good. The Soviet approach was also very stereotypical: get an army of mathematicians and engineers to find exact analytic solutions to the problems you're trying to solve. You'd have armies of engineers and technicians designing things that in the west we'd give to a couple of engineers with some computer time.
The end result is that some Soviet engineering is stunningly brilliant. And a lot is absolute crap. One of the reasons the west won the cold war is that we were just much better at solving partial differential equations. This report is unsurprising... the Soviet approach just seems so stupid to any Western engineer unfamiliar with it, that you'd have to assume they had some magic trick up their sleeve. But nope, just a lot of brainpower misdirected into a lot of horribly inefficient pursuits.
That's fine, it's welcome to have a go on a planet covered by dangerous life forms.