You do realize that authority, in the executive branch, devolves from the President? If the President doesn't have it, neither does anyone underneath him.
Any way they want to - probably as marketing. That business about having a fiducial responsibility to focus only on profits is only trotted out to confuse simple-minded people when a company does something unpopular.
Three Apollo site (11,14 and 15) , and the 2 Lunakhod sites, are still in use - they host Lunar Laser Ranging (LLR) retroreflectors, which are crucial to our knowledge of Lunar dynamics.
The Apollo 11 LLR is protected by NASA regulations, but the other sites are not. I (and numerous others) have made the point to NASA that having a rover come within meters of a retroreflector could cause problems, but I am not sure it has percolated into the contest teams.
This research (AFAICT from readying the original article, but not the scientific papers behind it) is not about prediction at all, it is about discovery. Google and Bing are not "A Logic Named Joe," about to infer subtle connections between different medical research papers and predict troubles when two drugs are combined. They just uncover when people are searching on (and thus, potentially having) multiple sets of symptoms. The difference is rather crucial - if two drugs have lethal side effects when combined, Google and Bing could only uncover that fact once people started dying.
A corollary is that a medically themed advice engine could discover these connections even faster if it had the same critical mass (for example, once it started to see a pattern, it could ask people inquiring about symptom X if they also have symptom Y). Now, if you could only get that past the malpractice attorneys...
In the US, this would be viewed as something requiring A.I. research. In China, another 5,000 or even 10,000 people get an "iron rice-bowl." Foxcon could handle this with their staff on break.
Note that the difference between 75% and 85% quantum efficiency is not that great. If the pixels at 7.5 the area of a competing CCD, then the CMOS would get (7.5 x 0.75 / 0.85 = 6.6 photons for every photon the CCD got; i.e., the exposures could go down by a factor of 6.6. Even if the CCD had 100% efficiency, that would still be a factor of 5.6.
This could be a boon in observing small asteroids, which are dim and tend to rotate fast (some less than 1 minute) due to YORP.
I have this mental image than in the future some people will be discriminated against because they cannot resolve captchas. Maybe there will be a job for those who are more human than normal humans.
By the way, try imposing a sudden spurt of activity on your credit card. Likely you will find it blocked. That happens to me all of the time, so i can believe your emails were blocked as well.
Back in the morse code days, people used to ID senders through their keying style. This was fairly routinely used (and abused) in the military - for example, when the Japanese Navy went to attack Pearl Harbor, the normal radio operators were kept behind and sent messages from (IIRC) the Kuril Islands, in case the US was tracking them as belonging to the carriers (which I don't believe we were).
There are a few journals - Nature and Science being the premier ones - which serve as filters, a word that I don't see mentioned in the OP. (Each field tends to have a few of their own, such as Physical Review Letters in physics, but let's keep it general.) A paper appearing in Nature or Science has passed through a fairly rigorous weeding out process, and is judged to be interesting and / or important to a wide audience. It may not be right, but it is likely to be worth reading. That is not the same as "prestige."
I don't see these journals going away, even if putting everything in Arxiv becomes routine (as I think it should). There is a lot of stuff published, and the need for filters is going to grow, not diminish, with time.
This has happened to me numerous times. It is frequently associated with a change in state - waking from sleep, a restart of the browser going to its stored state, going from a restricted or low bandwidth network to an open or higher bandwidth one. The machine then decides that "hey, there is this video marked as unplayed. I had better play it, right now!"
My guess is that you typically browse in a fashion where only one or two tabs/windows are open at once. I use the browser as a push-down stack, and have 50 or so open at any time.
It is highly annoying to be in a meeting and have your laptop decide that now is the time to play that flash animation that it couldn't get previously. If you keep a lot of tabs open (as I do) it can be very frustrating to find the one that is doing the deed. This feature might even get me using chrome more than I do now.
As Mr. Schneier points out, this doesn't scale. There is no way you could do a US Presidential election this way.
I also think it relies some on the autonomy of the Cardinals, which wouldn't necessarily map well to a civil election. Suppose that 100 people got together to elect (say) a town mayor using this protocol, and one of them was the employer of most of the rest. Would this be sufficient to prevent him from influencing or even coercing his employees to vote his way?
The robots in robot surgery are not the same as the robots in Isaac Asimov. A DaVinci robot has no autonomy at all, but is really just telepresence, an extension of the surgeon's hands and eyes. If anything goes wrong, it is the surgeon who is ultimately at fault (baring any mechanical or electrical problems, which I don't think they are alleging).
The BadRobotSurgery.com lawyers must know this; their web site sounds like it has all of he subtlety and morality of a Karl Rove political ad campaign.
And, of course, none of this really seems to have anything to do with unnecessary,medical procedures.
As I read the Outer Space Treaty, they would have no legal recourse to usurpers, as long as they weren't actually using the asteroid. The reason is that countries cannot claim property in outer space (Article II), therefore claims recognized by one country need have no weight in another. Now, it is a no-no to interfere with the work of astronauts (Article IX), but this is worded in a very weak and ambiguous fashion, which I think is sure to lead to troubles in the future. Since countries are responsible for what their nationals do in space (Articles VI-VIII), what would really happen is, if country X interfered with your mining claim, you would have to depend on what your country was willing to do about it.
I am not sure how this fits in the Outer Space Treaty, and thus what recourse they would have if (say) the Chinese used their beacons as a prospecting tool.
On the other hand, such beacons would probably make good VLBI targets.
Nothing is anonymous. Nothing is untraceable. If they really believe that, they are even more stupid than they appear on the surface, and that's bad enough.
There are no Spartiates any more. The wealthy today rely exclusively on hired hands for their security; history shows how weak a reed that is in the long run.
Police officers, environmentalists and EMERCOM experts at the site of a meteorite hit in the Chelyabinsk Region. Small 0.5-1 cm pieces of black matter resembling rock were found around the ice hole caused by the meteorite. Photo courtesy of the press service of the Interior Ministry's Main Directorate for the Chelyabinsk Region.(RIA Novosti)
(That's the caption to the second picture of the hole).
That is exactly what I would expect from a real hit. So maybe it is real.
It is too regular. Not impossible, but suspicious. I would also expect such an impact to fracture the nearby ice, but that seems pretty solid.
There should be a strewn field all around (i.e., other pieces), with easy to find small pieces on the snow/ice on top of the lake nearby. This would basically be a repeat of Targish Lake. I have heard no report of such finds.
If fishermen go out on the ice, fishermen cut holes in the ice. I would want to verify that they never cut 30 m holes.
Slashdot Mirror
You do realize that authority, in the executive branch, devolves from the President? If the President doesn't have it, neither does anyone underneath him.
Any way they want to - probably as marketing. That business about having a fiducial responsibility to focus only on profits is only trotted out to confuse simple-minded people when a company does something unpopular.
Three Apollo site (11,14 and 15) , and the 2 Lunakhod sites, are still in use - they host Lunar Laser Ranging (LLR) retroreflectors, which are crucial to our knowledge of Lunar dynamics.
The Apollo 11 LLR is protected by NASA regulations, but the other sites are not. I (and numerous others) have made the point to NASA that having a rover come within meters of a retroreflector could cause problems, but I am not sure it has percolated into the contest teams.
Are you saying that there is a lot of biblical porn out there ?
How does gay porn discriminate against women? (Or, if it does, then how does straight porn discriminate against women?)
It seems to me that you can have it both ways (not that these idiots wouldn't try).
This research (AFAICT from readying the original article, but not the scientific papers behind it) is not about prediction at all, it is about discovery. Google and Bing are not "A Logic Named Joe," about to infer subtle connections between different medical research papers and predict troubles when two drugs are combined. They just uncover when people are searching on (and thus, potentially having) multiple sets of symptoms. The difference is rather crucial - if two drugs have lethal side effects when combined, Google and Bing could only uncover that fact once people started dying.
A corollary is that a medically themed advice engine could discover these connections even faster if it had the same critical mass (for example, once it started to see a pattern, it could ask people inquiring about symptom X if they also have symptom Y). Now, if you could only get that past the malpractice attorneys...
(Besides the obvious political ones.)
In the US, this would be viewed as something requiring A.I. research. In China, another 5,000 or even 10,000 people get an "iron rice-bowl."
Foxcon could handle this with their staff on break.
Note that the difference between 75% and 85% quantum efficiency is not that great. If the pixels at 7.5 the area of a competing CCD, then the CMOS would get (7.5 x 0.75 / 0.85 = 6.6 photons for every photon the CCD got; i.e., the exposures could go down by a factor of 6.6. Even if the CCD had 100% efficiency, that would still be a factor of 5.6.
This could be a boon in observing small asteroids, which are dim and tend to rotate fast (some less than 1 minute) due to YORP.
Without looking at the original paper, who knows?
If I had to bet, right now, I would bet on Heisenberg. For now. Subject to change, of course.
Does anyone have a link to an actual pdf of the actual paper?
Has this interpretation of the original work been subject to peer review?
I have this mental image than in the future some people will be discriminated against because they cannot resolve captchas. Maybe there will be a job for those who are more human than normal humans.
By the way, try imposing a sudden spurt of activity on your credit card. Likely you will find it blocked. That happens to me all of the time, so i can believe your emails were blocked as well.
Back in the morse code days, people used to ID senders through their keying style. This was fairly routinely used (and abused) in the military - for example, when the Japanese Navy went to attack Pearl Harbor, the normal radio operators were kept behind and sent messages from (IIRC) the Kuril Islands, in case the US was tracking them as belonging to the carriers (which I don't believe we were).
There are a few journals - Nature and Science being the premier ones - which serve as filters, a word that I don't see mentioned in the OP. (Each field tends to have a few of their own, such as Physical Review Letters in physics, but let's keep it general.) A paper appearing in Nature or Science has passed through a fairly rigorous weeding out process, and is judged to be interesting and / or important to a wide audience. It may not be right, but it is likely to be worth reading. That is not the same as "prestige."
I don't see these journals going away, even if putting everything in Arxiv becomes routine (as I think it should). There is a lot of stuff published, and the need for filters is going to grow, not diminish, with time.
For me, he is well past his sell-by date. Can't he buy some remote island and cocoon there?
This has happened to me numerous times. It is frequently associated with a change in state - waking from sleep, a restart of the browser going to its stored state, going from a restricted or low bandwidth network to an open or higher bandwidth one. The machine then decides that "hey, there is this video marked as unplayed. I had better play it, right now!"
My guess is that you typically browse in a fashion where only one or two tabs/windows are open at once. I use the browser as a push-down stack, and have 50 or so open at any time.
It is highly annoying to be in a meeting and have your laptop decide that now is the time to play that flash animation that it couldn't get previously. If you keep a lot of tabs open (as I do) it can be very frustrating to find the one that is doing the deed. This feature might even get me using chrome more than I do now.
As Mr. Schneier points out, this doesn't scale. There is no way you could do a US Presidential election this way.
I also think it relies some on the autonomy of the Cardinals, which wouldn't necessarily map well to a civil election. Suppose that 100 people got together to elect (say) a town mayor using this protocol, and one of them was the employer of most of the rest. Would this be sufficient to prevent him from influencing or even coercing his employees to vote his way?
The robots in robot surgery are not the same as the robots in Isaac Asimov. A DaVinci robot has no autonomy at all, but is really just telepresence, an extension of the surgeon's hands and eyes. If anything goes wrong, it is the surgeon who is ultimately at fault (baring any mechanical or electrical problems, which I don't think they are alleging).
The BadRobotSurgery.com lawyers must know this; their web site sounds like it has all of he subtlety and morality of a Karl Rove political ad campaign.
And, of course, none of this really seems to have anything to do with unnecessary ,medical procedures.
He doesn't have the money.
As I read the Outer Space Treaty, they would have no legal recourse to usurpers, as long as they weren't actually using the asteroid. The reason is that countries cannot claim property in outer space (Article II), therefore claims recognized by one country need have no weight in another. Now, it is a no-no to interfere with the work of astronauts (Article IX), but this is worded in a very weak and ambiguous fashion, which I think is sure to lead to troubles in the future. Since countries are responsible for what their nationals do in space (Articles VI-VIII), what would really happen is, if country X interfered with your mining claim, you would have to depend on what your country was willing to do about it.
I am not sure how this fits in the Outer Space Treaty, and thus what recourse they would have if (say) the Chinese used their beacons as a prospecting tool.
On the other hand, such beacons would probably make good VLBI targets.
Nothing is anonymous. Nothing is untraceable. If they really believe that, they are even more stupid than they appear on the surface, and that's bad enough.
There are no Spartiates any more. The wealthy today rely exclusively on hired hands for their security; history shows how weak a reed that is in the long run.
On the other hand...
http://rt.com/news/meteorite-crash-urals-chelyabinsk-283/
Police officers, environmentalists and EMERCOM experts at the site of a meteorite hit in the Chelyabinsk Region. Small 0.5-1 cm pieces of black matter resembling rock were found around the ice hole caused by the meteorite. Photo courtesy of the press service of the Interior Ministry's Main Directorate for the Chelyabinsk Region.(RIA Novosti)
(That's the caption to the second picture of the hole).
That is exactly what I would expect from a real hit. So maybe it is real.
I now think the hole in Lake Chebarku is not the real impact site. Reasoning :
It is too regular. Not impossible, but suspicious. I would also expect such an impact to fracture the nearby ice, but that seems pretty solid.
There should be a strewn field all around (i.e., other pieces), with easy to find small pieces on the snow/ice on top of the lake nearby. This would basically be a repeat of Targish Lake. I have heard no report of such finds.
If fishermen go out on the ice, fishermen cut holes in the ice. I would want to verify that they never cut 30 m holes.
I actually hope it was ice (with a nice dust covering). Perfect place to land to preserve pieces of ice.