The patent was applied for in 1999, but I notice they mention touchpads and a a touchscreen. So, they are trying to pull them both in with this patent.
Too bad the following patents predate this patent by a few years to which they seem to be claiming to have invented.
US3662105: Electrical Sensor Of Plane Coordinates, Issued May 9, 1972
US3798370: Electrographic Sensor For Determining Planar Coordinates, Issued March 19, 1974
Two prior patents which I notice they neglected to mention, and only include a bunch of patents that all have individual parts of what they are claiming. It looks like they simply looked through a bunch of patents and said, hmm, Let's combine these patents into one. Voila! New innovative patent that no one has thought of.
Good point. Although, I doubt you can say for certain, the Vikings thought it was attached to Russia. It's certainly not true that they couldn't have mapped it out, or known it was an ice covered island. They did live there for 500 years. It's quite possible they traveled north and mapped it by both foot and boat.
The Greenland drawing is the weakest point for that map. Still, not an unknowable thing. The Vikings were pretty smart and resourceful. They did after all colonize Newfoundland (briefly), which means they navigated both sides of Greenland before 1500.
Who knows what the summers were like in Greenland when the Vikings were initially there. It must have been some pretty warm times back then for them to call it Greenland. Are you certain they couldn't have navigated it in 1000 AD? Do we have any authentic maps from then to show us what the permanent ice looked like then? Have we dated the ice layer up there and can show it is older than 500 years? I'm sure some people know these answers and I could probably find them. But then I'm not saying it's authentic, just that it was knowable.
How about the dvd drive? The USB, network and card slots are also nice little spots for jamming in already been chewed and disliked candy or gum. I'd be willing to bet some kid might try stuffing jellied toast or peanut butter into any opening on a PC. I had to keep a very vigilant eye on my daughter, who still managed to insert a paper clip into one of my dvd drives, and thus laid the trap for me to destroy an important DVD.
Re:Absurd? Are you taking the piss?
on
P.I.I. In the Sky
·
· Score: 1
I was thinking the same thing.
I further wonder when/. started allowing Trolls to post articles?
Not only is the article poster wrong that it identifies a person, it doesn't even identify a device. Only a mac address will identify a device. For example. I have at my home:
1) one temporary IP address, which remains the same most of the time, but does change a few times a years at least,
2) a wired router,
3) a wireless router,
4) a headless gateway/ firewall computer,
5) a wired netwrok, with several devices hooked up,
6) a wireless network with several devices hooked up.
All of these devices share one, count it, one real IP address. So which of these dozen or so devices is uniquely identified by the IP address?
Furthermore, at least three of the devices allow multiple accounts (Linux/Windows PCs) and users. So please tell me who, among the many users, including the limited weak password protected anonymous user account access on the wireless router, is the person uniquely identified by that changing IP address?
This is without a doubt the dumbest article I have EVER seen on/..
As for the map, there really wasn't any need for physical analysis of it to know that it cannot be genuine, as it contains information that was unknowable in the 15th century. According to the wikipedia page, the writing on the map also contains anachronisms. Did someone take a genuine map and add Japan, Australia and Newfoundland, or was it a complete forgery from the ground up?
Information that was unknowable? What information?
If you'd bother to look at the map which is part of the Wikipedia article linked in this article, you'd see, there is no Australia on that map. As far as Japan. Japan was certainly known. You know from the Silk road trade routes with China and the spice routes that existed back into antiquity. You know those primitives like the Greeks and Romans and earlier civilizations that all had trade with China. Ever heard of Marco Polo (1254-1324), who lived in the 13th and 14th centuries? He went to China and knew of Japan. Japan was written about as early as his visit and his story was widely and wildly popular in Europe. So to say it was unknowable that Japan existed is the exact opposite of what is true. It would have been almost impossible to NOT know about Japan in the 15th century. I see nothing on the map that was unknowable in the 15th century.
I guess this is part of the reason why you are NOT an expert on ancient maps and forgeries. Although, the first thing that I thought of was, maybe someone added Vinland to a genuine 15th century map. I'm no expert, but if I were that'd be on the things I'd spend five years trying to (dis/)prove.
No it's not legal to drive 45 MPH in the "passing lane". In fact it's not even really legal to "drive" in the passing lane.
In your state. Not mine.
What state do you live in? NeverNeverland state? Or Michigan? I'm not aware of any state you could go to and drive 45 in the left lane in a 65 and not get pulled over or given a ticket.
Man I wish I had picked a different example because people are jumping all over this (making the same mistake *I* did in thinking that the whole US works like their home state) instead of actually paying attention to my points.
Your points would be more meaningful and relevant if you used more meaningful and relevant examples.
And in the real world, it's perfectly legal to do all kinds of really annoying things.
Which was one of my points and I see you got it clearly.
Doctor Griefer here bemoans the "herd-like" mentality of people playing the game, and he claims that only the "laws" of the game matter and not the social customs. But anyone who acts like he did in real life and who hides behind the refuge of saying, "There's no law against that!" would be just as quickly hated and outcast.
Ah, I see you didn't RTFA. Or just didn't get the professor's point.
OMG! Sue me! So one state, Arkansas doesn't have a keep right law, that makes it illegal for cars not passing to be in the left lane. Yes, there are eight states that specifically make it illegal to drive in the left lane, which is why I put my statement about "driving" in quotes. Because the other states say slower traffic to the right (or under the SL). Which means if you're not passing someone you are probably going slower than them, or are blocking the normal flow, and hence you'll be in trouble with the many state laws that talk about slower traffic. Because if you aren't passing how do prove you weren't going slower by even a 1/2 mph? If a cop wanted to he could pull you over and mess your whole day up using this law and be justified in doing so.
Just like a cop could give a ticket to every burger place in NYC for selling cheeseburgers with pickles. Because it's against the law to serve a pickle with cheese (Thank you WWII food rationing geniuses). Good luck to the cop who tries it though.
There are no other lien holders OTHER than Wells Fargo. They could get the clear title by simply by paying off the first and second liens with their own cash and taking out a new lien combining the two liens into one. Of course that would probably require the cooperation of the person/entity that took out both mortgages. Or alternatively, they could do several other things that simply don't require them to sue themselves.
I personally don't see how you can sue anyone to get a clear title. If I have a judgment against consumer X and have a court ordered lien on his property, suing me for my lien won't get you a clear title. The only way to release my lien is to pay me what the lien is worth. If, I had a lien against a piece of property, and someone sued me to release that lien, I'd file for summary judgment in my favor and for attorneys fees and punitive damages. There are only two ways to get a lien on a piece of property, that I know of: one by legally binding loan contract, or by a court order. Either one of those would be positive proof of my lien claim and hence there could be no dispute as to the facts.
But then this IS Florida AND the US Court System we are talking about, and there is certainly no lack of stupidity in that state. I know, I've lived there briefly and saw the rampant stupidity well before Bush vs. Gore. The only people dumber than the people of Florida are the tourists in Daytona Beach. If you don't believe me, go there sometime and get to the beach early at low tide. I once saw a man "washing" (rinsing more like it) his car with water from the ocean, to "get the sand off". Yes, I actually had to ask this guy what he was doing and why. For my own morbid curiosity.
Basically, he played the game (actually fighting villains) and was hated for it. Not because he was being vile or crude (indeed, completely contrary to what you suggest) but by violating game defeating "customs." Why the hell have a city full of heroes and villains, if the villains and heroes just idly chat and don't actually fight each other?
Because people actually like it that way? I mean, who is this self-proclaimed researcher to go around enforcing his vision of how people should play the game with the equivalent of violent force?
Why do you say that going around beating up villains is actually "playing the game" and the people standing around and chatting aren't? Who gets to say what the game actually is? The developers or the people who play it?
In the real world, the people who make the laws of our society are our society's "developers," but the people who actually live in the world, or the "players," often set up unwritten rules. Just because the law says that something is okay, doesn't mean that it really is.
It's like people who go 45 MPH in the left lane on a 55 MPH road. Yeah, that's definitely what the laws say you can do, but most people don't, and the presence of a vehicle going a different speed from the flow of traffic creates danger and stress that shouldn't be there.
Thank God you don't have a license to drive. Because you don't even know the rules to break them. No it's not legal to drive 45 MPH in the "passing lane". In fact it's not even really legal to "drive" in the passing lane. The right lane is for driving, and the left lane is for passing. If, you're in the left lane you're supposed to be passing. You could actually get a ticket for driving in the left lane, regardless of speed, but most people probably aren't even aware of that. Of course, then there are highways with more than two lanes in either direction. In which case every lane is a driving lane, except for the left lane. Unless of course the left lane is for high occupancy vehicles, then the next to left lane is the passing lane. If you want to be totally accuratre with regards to the law.
And yes, it is the developers who make the laws/rules of the game. Which is just like in the real world, there are people who live by the laws and there are people who totally ignore the laws, and there are those who live by the laws that are socially acceptable to the portion of society they mingle with. Sometimes, the various factions interact with each other, such as the person driving 55 in a 55 in the driving lane, even when the flow is 60mph, and the maniac doing 90mph in the passing lane.
I see nothing wrong with what the professor did. So he's a sociopath. Welcome to the world of geeks and nerds. Einstein was kind of sociopathic too. As well as my favorite, Tesla. That guy was pretty whacked, but brilliant.
So, a guy comes along and plays by the rules and is unkillable because no one can defeat him. Sounds like the players aren't all that good. Which is maybe why they developed their own rules. because the game was tooo haaard. Wah.
Geez, don't you know anything!? You don't need launch codes. All you have to do is hack into the DOD WOPPER computer and launch the Global Thermonuclear War game, and then trash your PC. The game will run to completion. Unless you can get it to play itsellf in a game of Tic-Tac-Toe.
You can also assume magical fairy dust and free energy, but that doesn't make it so. You can ask if there are better ways, but you can't assume it, and in the end you will find there is no magic.
Clusters and replication are NOT NEW. Not even remotely new. There is, in fact, nothing new architecturally at all that would indicate some new capability that hasn't already been repeatedly analyzed and tried.
Wheel bearings were invented by the Danes around 400 AD (or BC), Ball bearings were invented around 1770.
Just because, something is repeatedly analyzed and tried, doesn't mean that there isn't a better way. Using your logic we might as well say, there is nothing new or undiscovered under the Sun, Moon, and Stars (tm). Just because something is good and works doesn't mean we shouldn't constantly be looking for better ways. I'm sure the first time a person saw sulfur on the stick used to make fire it would seem like magic to someone still using a flint to make fire. Who is to say there isn't some drastically better algorithm just over the horizon? I personally welcome these innovative, skeptical people looking for something better.
"Won't work in your scenario as all the grandchildren of B will have different left hand and right hand values. Or your solution grows in time with 2O(2^(n/2))."
Then design queries to answer questions such as:
* Find the nodes in the subtree under B.
SELECT * FROM rows WHERE left > [left hand value of B] AND right < [right hand value of B]
Won't work in your scenario as all the grandchildren of B will have different left hand and right hand values. Or your solution grows in time with O(n^2).
Design an efficient table relating a tree structure.
Huh? Tree structures are best handled by relational databases, as it is far faster then recursion. Give row a unique ID and a parent ID, and in addition, a left hand and right hand number, the root node having a left-hand value of 1 and a right hand value of (number rows * 2), the first child node has a left-hand value of one more than the parent's, the right-hand value is one less then the left-hand of a younger sibling.
Unfortuinately, your solution grows geometrically. Let's take as a sample my family tree, which I've traced, incompletely, to 16 generations.
Number of people in a generation:
my daughter (1),
her parents (2),
her grandparents (4),
gr-grandparents (8), ...
12th gr-grandparents (2^16 ~ 32,000)
Using your algorithm, to find any one of those 12th gr-grandparents, her record would have to have over 16000 left sides and over 16000 right sides creating a solution that grows in time as 2(O(2^(n/2)).
That is not to say that SQL can't do trees efficiently. For an example of a successful algorithm, you might want to check out the source for PHPGedView ( a genealogy web database app that can use SQL ).
Then design queries to answer questions such as:
* Find the nodes in the subtree under B.
SELECT * FROM rows WHERE left > [left hand value of B] AND right < [right hand value of B]
Won't work in your scenario as all the grandchildren of B will have different left hand and right hand values. Or your solution grows in time with O(n^2).
* Find all ancesters of G
SELECT * FROM rows WHERE left < [left hand value of G] AND right > [right hand value of G]
This is just so wrong, where do I begin.
* Find the nearest common ancestor of D and H
SELECT * FROM rows WHERE left < [lowest left hand value from D,H] AND right > [highest right hand value from D,H] ORDER BY right LIMIT 1
Still not working.
Trees is a wellknown problem of SQL, but the fact is that SQL can't handle most datastructures and complex relations, only very simple one dimensional ones.
Are you saying trees are easy or hard? And for more complex systems, that is what JOINs are for. SQL is by far the most powerful way and often the fastest way to manipulate data that I know of. The only time I can recall that I had to use a non-SQL solution that was faster then the SQL solution was a matrix operation.
Finding degrees of affinity in genealogy IS a MATRIX operation (or can be one)! It can't be solved by a tree alone. Using a tree philosophy, the fastest solution, would require you to: traverse a person's family relationships, store that result, traverse the other person's family relationships, then return the relationship with the newest date. Something that can be done very fast in a properly designed SQL dbs [ 2O(log n) + O(log (O(log n))]. Unfortunately, your design isn't one of those I would call properly designed. Of, course, I've oversimplified the problem by ignoring the complexities of the Real World. Such as: adopted children, multiple parents (step parent families), multiple family relationships as a result of cousin marriages, et cetera. It's really a much more complex problem than your simplistic solution would suggest. Which is why it is such an interesting problem.
Be careful there. Works that are public domain can be reprinted, and the typos fixed (iffy), or an index added or a new forward, etc. and voia! It is now copyrightable again, but, the old material is still public domain, not the whole work. The problem is the world is full of uninformed and uninterested sheep, who believe anything that is printed or broadcast. Now, if the "copyfraud" people are simply reprinting the original books with no change and claiming copyright, then that would be fraud. Last, I checked, if they are selling more than $500 dollars worth, then that's a felony, and in all but one state, private citizens have the right to citizen's arrest.
So the answer to the problem is two-fold.
1) Educate the people,
2) find the people doing the fraud and get a police officer to come with you as you make a citizen's arrest, unless you can get the officer to do it.
Of course this means actually leaving the computer and doing something about it.
Alternatively you can simply laugh at the copyfraud people, or publish your own version of it with the disclaimer it is a public domain work. I don't know how much these works are being charged, but, I've seen plenty of public domain works reprinted and sold. Sometimes, the prices are reasonable (i.e. enough to cover the cost of printing and distribution, and other times the prices are astronomical. Hence the term "buyer beware". Sometimes a collector's type of book is printed, and a premium charged for this. I see nothing wrong in reprinting Sherlock Holmes in a fancy, glorious cover and charging for it at a reasonable profitable price. I think great PD material should continue to be republished, in many formats. I think it is also reasonable to profit from doing so. While these copyfraudsters, if indeed they are, are certainly despicable. Just because they pretend to take something out of PD and copyright it, doesn't stop anyone else from publishing it also. PD works can't really be taken out of PD by fraudulently claiming copyright on them.
I'd love to see a case where one of these fraudsters tried to enforce the copyright on such works. That'd open them up for a whole can of legal hurt.
Maybe they should market condom undies for women and see how they fly? Women could have sex and be protected and never have to take off their undies. Once the sex is over all they have to do is discard the attached condom and replace. It's a win win win win situation.
I think you'll find female condoms, would be as popular as male condoms.
There are numerous reasons why guys don't use condoms. These reasons are commonly known. One you have to carry them around with you and it is something that has to be opened and put on before continuing. Less sensation. Etc. etc. etc.
This has all been covered before in other studies. Hence, it is wasted tax dollars as they will get the same answer they got back in the 50s, 60s, and 70s on the epidemic spread of the (eventually) fatal STD Herpes. There are treatments now that reduce the effects of Herpes. Considering condoms have been around for millennia, and they aren't any more prevalent now as then, I doubt any study has anything NEW to find. Hence if it is unlikely to further the current knowledge, then yes it is wasted government spending. Like spending money trying to determine effect of a bullet to a dog's brain (an actual government funded research project).
The money would be better spent coming up with vaccines for the various STDs. Eliminate the attack vector and you eliminate problem. Trying to get historically proven large proportions of unthinking, uncaring members of the male species to act in any other way than they historically have with the same knowledge is a fruitless waste of time.
I'm married and have no mistress(es) and therefore have no further need for condoms.
So, do you find that the cost of your water and sewer is exorbitant? Or is it more economical to buy your water in bottles and jugs? My water, sewer and trash are all quite efficient and among the cheapest expenses I have. So, a city wants to add citywide internet. It's adds a new competitor. So, competition and choice is good right?
Or has choice made Linux a bad thing?
Who is to say that once the network is built that the city might not contract out the support to competing bidders? Maybe they will bite off more than they can chew. But if they have put in place the hardware and topology, it will have value that they can lease or sell. I can't see a downside to this. They build it and succeed, and everyone gets cheaper faster internet; or they build it and fail and sell/lease it off to some third party who then directly competes with the established players.
Where's the bad in either of those scenarios?
Well the field this article talks about is probably much stronger than a speaker's . Therefore, accordingly, it could have a negative impact on HDDs, if it is more than a a few tens of times stronger. It doesn't need to affect every molecule on a HDD to cause corruption. It only takes one weak spot. Unless you are proposing that a HDD has a perfectly uniform distribution of field strength with no weak spots. Which is fine...
in theory.
But never occurs in application. I wouldn't feel comfortable having one of these anywhere near my HDD, and even less so near my many memory sticks. Or near my LCD monitors. What if only one in ten thousand bits gets flipped on an HDD, or one in 10 million? Are you really confident that we can produce an HDD that doesn't have 1 weak point every 10,000,000 bits? That's about a 99.99999% manufacturing precision. I'd love to see that. Especially now that densities are getter so much higher. High enough where we are reaching the maximum theoretical density.
This is a bad idea, waiting for a disaster to cause And they're talking about putting these in laptops! Not to mention they are trying to claim IP on this. Even after admitting that Tesla invented it a century ago.
Actually, the law makes it clear that it is a bad as armed robbery of a bank or killing your neighbor. It appears that stealing a car or killing you wife might get you a lighter sentence than getting caught with marijuana.
I have to say your example for a slippery slope argument is bad. I'm actually for random drug testing. I'd like to think that I can feel safe in that some doped out worker didn't assemble my car or a nuclear warhead. I certainly don't want a building full of drunk and high workers at the local Nuclear power plant. You know, just in case something goes wrong, I'd like to think I can feel better that sane, sober and rational workers will be able to solve a problem BEFORE the reactor goes super-critical. Or that the engine won't fall off the jet I'm flying in. And a million other little things like that.
That said, good luck to those geniuses in Montana. They had what maybe ten job applicants? Now they might get two? I can see how this will help them make a hiring decision. How many people live in Bozeman, MT? Yeah, I just love those nice sunny summer days up there. Both of them.
Because reducing the population is a good thing. I say let the Chinese have their custom and the violent population reduction that comes with it.
If they are to die then let them die and reduce the surplus population.
Want to grow up to become an athlete? Sorry, your parents couldn't afford to select genes that predispose you to becoming tall / strong / better cardiovascular function.
Or you could do it the old fashioned way and eat healthy, stay away from unhealthy things, work out a lot and practice, practice, practice.
Want to grow up to become a model? Sorry, your parents couldn't afford to give you a slender physique, blond, and blue eyes.
Or you could just become anorexic like all the successful models
Want health insurance? Sure, but it's going to be more expensive because your parents couldn't afford to eliminate your risk of ALS.
Good salient point.
The challenging part is that yeah, if I have the choice to prevent my future kids from developing life-shortening diseases, I've got to do it.
Tough ethical choices ahead of us, imho.
I don't see why this is an ethical issue. So people want children with particular traits. Traits that evolutionarily speaking would, most likely, be naturally selected more often than not anyway. Better genes going forward. Or at least the ones that would probably rank higher in desirability, which would be selected more anyway. I mean when the last time you said wow, that is one truly ugly person, I must mate with her/him? Selecting for better, faster, stronger, smarter, better looking, less disease prone mates (and thus hopefully children) is what natural selection is and always has been all about. So now we have a new, improved, tool to help the process along. Where's the moral dilemma? the only worry we should have is governments or religion dictating them, rather than individuals. Oh wait, that's what the Pope is doing! Be afraid, be very afraid.
You're forgetting one minor detail. When there is a shortage of females of a species, the males of that species tend to be more aggressive in obtaining the mating rights to said females. Thus producing a great deal of infighting and killing, and thus restoring the natural balance. See, even throwing in artificially imposed genetic selection, nature will still prevail. At least until the governemnt DNA selects out the aggression gene in all people except the elites.
Besides, I know, and know of, lots of useless males who totally deserve to live and die lonely sexless lives.
God, I hate that euphemism. Slippery slope. Get real people. Everyone already screens for DNA traits. Usually, though, people use secondary evidential characteristics rather than actual scientific DNA traits. I choose the DNA traits for my child. I choose someone who only had blond and red alleles for hair color and blue and green alleles for eye color. I chose the shape of the nose, the skeletal build, intelligence, etc. Ok so not all of my criteria were based on definable genes, but some were. I wound up with a blue-eyed, strawberry blonde, average height, above average intellect child. It's stupid to get upset over choosing eye and hair color.
All this means is that the new questionnaires will include questions like what color is your hair and that of your parents and siblings. Ditto on eye color.
Duh.
The people who want to choose eye color will still be able to, only not quite as foolproof, and the clinics get the DNAnazis off their back.
I totally get wanting to choose an eye and hair color that matches at least one of the parents.
Ah, yes but what do I do in the meantime while waiting for the school district to do their job, while they keep reassuring me they are analyzing the issue?
Slashdot Mirror
The patent was applied for in 1999, but I notice they mention touchpads and a a touchscreen. So, they are trying to pull them both in with this patent.
Too bad the following patents predate this patent by a few years to which they seem to be claiming to have invented.
US3662105: Electrical Sensor Of Plane Coordinates, Issued May 9, 1972
US3798370: Electrographic Sensor For Determining Planar Coordinates, Issued March 19, 1974
Two prior patents which I notice they neglected to mention, and only include a bunch of patents that all have individual parts of what they are claiming. It looks like they simply looked through a bunch of patents and said, hmm, Let's combine these patents into one. Voila! New innovative patent that no one has thought of.
Good point. Although, I doubt you can say for certain, the Vikings thought it was attached to Russia. It's certainly not true that they couldn't have mapped it out, or known it was an ice covered island. They did live there for 500 years. It's quite possible they traveled north and mapped it by both foot and boat.
The Greenland drawing is the weakest point for that map. Still, not an unknowable thing. The Vikings were pretty smart and resourceful. They did after all colonize Newfoundland (briefly), which means they navigated both sides of Greenland before 1500.
Who knows what the summers were like in Greenland when the Vikings were initially there. It must have been some pretty warm times back then for them to call it Greenland. Are you certain they couldn't have navigated it in 1000 AD? Do we have any authentic maps from then to show us what the permanent ice looked like then? Have we dated the ice layer up there and can show it is older than 500 years? I'm sure some people know these answers and I could probably find them. But then I'm not saying it's authentic, just that it was knowable.
How about the dvd drive? The USB, network and card slots are also nice little spots for jamming in already been chewed and disliked candy or gum. I'd be willing to bet some kid might try stuffing jellied toast or peanut butter into any opening on a PC. I had to keep a very vigilant eye on my daughter, who still managed to insert a paper clip into one of my dvd drives, and thus laid the trap for me to destroy an important DVD.
I was thinking the same thing.
/. started allowing Trolls to post articles?
/..
I further wonder when
Not only is the article poster wrong that it identifies a person, it doesn't even identify a device. Only a mac address will identify a device. For example. I have at my home:
1) one temporary IP address, which remains the same most of the time, but does change a few times a years at least,
2) a wired router,
3) a wireless router,
4) a headless gateway/ firewall computer,
5) a wired netwrok, with several devices hooked up,
6) a wireless network with several devices hooked up.
All of these devices share one, count it, one real IP address. So which of these dozen or so devices is uniquely identified by the IP address? Furthermore, at least three of the devices allow multiple accounts (Linux/Windows PCs) and users. So please tell me who, among the many users, including the limited weak password protected anonymous user account access on the wireless router, is the person uniquely identified by that changing IP address?
This is without a doubt the dumbest article I have EVER seen on
As for the map, there really wasn't any need for physical analysis of it to know that it cannot be genuine, as it contains information that was unknowable in the 15th century. According to the wikipedia page, the writing on the map also contains anachronisms. Did someone take a genuine map and add Japan, Australia and Newfoundland, or was it a complete forgery from the ground up?
Information that was unknowable? What information?
If you'd bother to look at the map which is part of the Wikipedia article linked in this article, you'd see, there is no Australia on that map. As far as Japan. Japan was certainly known. You know from the Silk road trade routes with China and the spice routes that existed back into antiquity. You know those primitives like the Greeks and Romans and earlier civilizations that all had trade with China. Ever heard of Marco Polo (1254-1324), who lived in the 13th and 14th centuries? He went to China and knew of Japan. Japan was written about as early as his visit and his story was widely and wildly popular in Europe. So to say it was unknowable that Japan existed is the exact opposite of what is true. It would have been almost impossible to NOT know about Japan in the 15th century. I see nothing on the map that was unknowable in the 15th century.
I guess this is part of the reason why you are NOT an expert on ancient maps and forgeries. Although, the first thing that I thought of was, maybe someone added Vinland to a genuine 15th century map. I'm no expert, but if I were that'd be on the things I'd spend five years trying to (dis/)prove.
No it's not legal to drive 45 MPH in the "passing lane". In fact it's not even really legal to "drive" in the passing lane.
In your state. Not mine.
What state do you live in? NeverNeverland state? Or Michigan? I'm not aware of any state you could go to and drive 45 in the left lane in a 65 and not get pulled over or given a ticket.
Man I wish I had picked a different example because people are jumping all over this (making the same mistake *I* did in thinking that the whole US works like their home state) instead of actually paying attention to my points.
Your points would be more meaningful and relevant if you used more meaningful and relevant examples.
And in the real world, it's perfectly legal to do all kinds of really annoying things.
Which was one of my points and I see you got it clearly.
Doctor Griefer here bemoans the "herd-like" mentality of people playing the game, and he claims that only the "laws" of the game matter and not the social customs. But anyone who acts like he did in real life and who hides behind the refuge of saying, "There's no law against that!" would be just as quickly hated and outcast.
Ah, I see you didn't RTFA. Or just didn't get the professor's point.
OMG! Sue me! So one state, Arkansas doesn't have a keep right law, that makes it illegal for cars not passing to be in the left lane. Yes, there are eight states that specifically make it illegal to drive in the left lane, which is why I put my statement about "driving" in quotes. Because the other states say slower traffic to the right (or under the SL). Which means if you're not passing someone you are probably going slower than them, or are blocking the normal flow, and hence you'll be in trouble with the many state laws that talk about slower traffic. Because if you aren't passing how do prove you weren't going slower by even a 1/2 mph? If a cop wanted to he could pull you over and mess your whole day up using this law and be justified in doing so.
Just like a cop could give a ticket to every burger place in NYC for selling cheeseburgers with pickles. Because it's against the law to serve a pickle with cheese (Thank you WWII food rationing geniuses). Good luck to the cop who tries it though.
There are no other lien holders OTHER than Wells Fargo. They could get the clear title by simply by paying off the first and second liens with their own cash and taking out a new lien combining the two liens into one. Of course that would probably require the cooperation of the person/entity that took out both mortgages. Or alternatively, they could do several other things that simply don't require them to sue themselves.
I personally don't see how you can sue anyone to get a clear title. If I have a judgment against consumer X and have a court ordered lien on his property, suing me for my lien won't get you a clear title. The only way to release my lien is to pay me what the lien is worth. If, I had a lien against a piece of property, and someone sued me to release that lien, I'd file for summary judgment in my favor and for attorneys fees and punitive damages. There are only two ways to get a lien on a piece of property, that I know of: one by legally binding loan contract, or by a court order. Either one of those would be positive proof of my lien claim and hence there could be no dispute as to the facts.
But then this IS Florida AND the US Court System we are talking about, and there is certainly no lack of stupidity in that state. I know, I've lived there briefly and saw the rampant stupidity well before Bush vs. Gore. The only people dumber than the people of Florida are the tourists in Daytona Beach. If you don't believe me, go there sometime and get to the beach early at low tide. I once saw a man "washing" (rinsing more like it) his car with water from the ocean, to "get the sand off". Yes, I actually had to ask this guy what he was doing and why. For my own morbid curiosity.
Basically, he played the game (actually fighting villains) and was hated for it. Not because he was being vile or crude (indeed, completely contrary to what you suggest) but by violating game defeating "customs." Why the hell have a city full of heroes and villains, if the villains and heroes just idly chat and don't actually fight each other?
Because people actually like it that way? I mean, who is this self-proclaimed researcher to go around enforcing his vision of how people should play the game with the equivalent of violent force?
Why do you say that going around beating up villains is actually "playing the game" and the people standing around and chatting aren't? Who gets to say what the game actually is? The developers or the people who play it?
In the real world, the people who make the laws of our society are our society's "developers," but the people who actually live in the world, or the "players," often set up unwritten rules. Just because the law says that something is okay, doesn't mean that it really is.
It's like people who go 45 MPH in the left lane on a 55 MPH road. Yeah, that's definitely what the laws say you can do, but most people don't, and the presence of a vehicle going a different speed from the flow of traffic creates danger and stress that shouldn't be there.
Thank God you don't have a license to drive. Because you don't even know the rules to break them. No it's not legal to drive 45 MPH in the "passing lane". In fact it's not even really legal to "drive" in the passing lane. The right lane is for driving, and the left lane is for passing. If, you're in the left lane you're supposed to be passing. You could actually get a ticket for driving in the left lane, regardless of speed, but most people probably aren't even aware of that. Of course, then there are highways with more than two lanes in either direction. In which case every lane is a driving lane, except for the left lane. Unless of course the left lane is for high occupancy vehicles, then the next to left lane is the passing lane. If you want to be totally accuratre with regards to the law.
And yes, it is the developers who make the laws/rules of the game. Which is just like in the real world, there are people who live by the laws and there are people who totally ignore the laws, and there are those who live by the laws that are socially acceptable to the portion of society they mingle with. Sometimes, the various factions interact with each other, such as the person driving 55 in a 55 in the driving lane, even when the flow is 60mph, and the maniac doing 90mph in the passing lane.
I see nothing wrong with what the professor did. So he's a sociopath. Welcome to the world of geeks and nerds. Einstein was kind of sociopathic too. As well as my favorite, Tesla. That guy was pretty whacked, but brilliant.
So, a guy comes along and plays by the rules and is unkillable because no one can defeat him. Sounds like the players aren't all that good. Which is maybe why they developed their own rules. because the game was tooo haaard. Wah.
Geez, don't you know anything!? You don't need launch codes. All you have to do is hack into the DOD WOPPER computer and launch the Global Thermonuclear War game, and then trash your PC. The game will run to completion. Unless you can get it to play itsellf in a game of Tic-Tac-Toe.
Sheesh, NOOBs.!
Yeah, just like Gonorrhea and Syphilis have disappeared ...
oh, that's right, they're still around.
You can also assume magical fairy dust and free energy, but that doesn't make it so. You can ask if there are better ways, but you can't assume it, and in the end you will find there is no magic.
Clusters and replication are NOT NEW. Not even remotely new. There is, in fact, nothing new architecturally at all that would indicate some new capability that hasn't already been repeatedly analyzed and tried.
Wheel bearings were invented by the Danes around 400 AD (or BC), Ball bearings were invented around 1770.
Just because, something is repeatedly analyzed and tried, doesn't mean that there isn't a better way. Using your logic we might as well say, there is nothing new or undiscovered under the Sun, Moon, and Stars (tm). Just because something is good and works doesn't mean we shouldn't constantly be looking for better ways. I'm sure the first time a person saw sulfur on the stick used to make fire it would seem like magic to someone still using a flint to make fire. Who is to say there isn't some drastically better algorithm just over the horizon? I personally welcome these innovative, skeptical people looking for something better.
"Won't work in your scenario as all the grandchildren of B will have different left hand and right hand values. Or your solution grows in time with 2O(2^(n/2))."
Then design queries to answer questions such as: * Find the nodes in the subtree under B.
SELECT * FROM rows WHERE left > [left hand value of B] AND right < [right hand value of B]
Won't work in your scenario as all the grandchildren of B will have different left hand and right hand values. Or your solution grows in time with O(n^2).
Design an efficient table relating a tree structure.
Huh? Tree structures are best handled by relational databases, as it is far faster then recursion. Give row a unique ID and a parent ID, and in addition, a left hand and right hand number, the root node having a left-hand value of 1 and a right hand value of (number rows * 2), the first child node has a left-hand value of one more than the parent's, the right-hand value is one less then the left-hand of a younger sibling.
Unfortuinately, your solution grows geometrically. Let's take as a sample my family tree, which I've traced, incompletely, to 16 generations.
...
Number of people in a generation:
my daughter (1),
her parents (2),
her grandparents (4),
gr-grandparents (8),
12th gr-grandparents (2^16 ~ 32,000)
Using your algorithm, to find any one of those 12th gr-grandparents, her record would have to have over 16000 left sides and over 16000 right sides creating a solution that grows in time as 2(O(2^(n/2)).
That is not to say that SQL can't do trees efficiently. For an example of a successful algorithm, you might want to check out the source for PHPGedView ( a genealogy web database app that can use SQL ).
Then design queries to answer questions such as: * Find the nodes in the subtree under B.
SELECT * FROM rows WHERE left > [left hand value of B] AND right < [right hand value of B]
Won't work in your scenario as all the grandchildren of B will have different left hand and right hand values. Or your solution grows in time with O(n^2).
* Find all ancesters of G
SELECT * FROM rows WHERE left < [left hand value of G] AND right > [right hand value of G]
This is just so wrong, where do I begin.
* Find the nearest common ancestor of D and H
SELECT * FROM rows WHERE left < [lowest left hand value from D,H] AND right > [highest right hand value from D,H] ORDER BY right LIMIT 1
Still not working.
Trees is a wellknown problem of SQL, but the fact is that SQL can't handle most datastructures and complex relations, only very simple one dimensional ones.
Are you saying trees are easy or hard? And for more complex systems, that is what JOINs are for. SQL is by far the most powerful way and often the fastest way to manipulate data that I know of. The only time I can recall that I had to use a non-SQL solution that was faster then the SQL solution was a matrix operation.
Finding degrees of affinity in genealogy IS a MATRIX operation (or can be one)! It can't be solved by a tree alone. Using a tree philosophy, the fastest solution, would require you to: traverse a person's family relationships, store that result, traverse the other person's family relationships, then return the relationship with the newest date. Something that can be done very fast in a properly designed SQL dbs [ 2O(log n) + O(log (O(log n))]. Unfortunately, your design isn't one of those I would call properly designed. Of, course, I've oversimplified the problem by ignoring the complexities of the Real World. Such as: adopted children, multiple parents (step parent families), multiple family relationships as a result of cousin marriages, et cetera. It's really a much more complex problem than your simplistic solution would suggest. Which is why it is such an interesting problem.
Be careful there. Works that are public domain can be reprinted, and the typos fixed (iffy), or an index added or a new forward, etc. and voia! It is now copyrightable again, but, the old material is still public domain, not the whole work. The problem is the world is full of uninformed and uninterested sheep, who believe anything that is printed or broadcast. Now, if the "copyfraud" people are simply reprinting the original books with no change and claiming copyright, then that would be fraud. Last, I checked, if they are selling more than $500 dollars worth, then that's a felony, and in all but one state, private citizens have the right to citizen's arrest.
So the answer to the problem is two-fold.
1) Educate the people,
2) find the people doing the fraud and get a police officer to come with you as you make a citizen's arrest, unless you can get the officer to do it.
Of course this means actually leaving the computer and doing something about it.
Alternatively you can simply laugh at the copyfraud people, or publish your own version of it with the disclaimer it is a public domain work. I don't know how much these works are being charged, but, I've seen plenty of public domain works reprinted and sold. Sometimes, the prices are reasonable (i.e. enough to cover the cost of printing and distribution, and other times the prices are astronomical. Hence the term "buyer beware". Sometimes a collector's type of book is printed, and a premium charged for this. I see nothing wrong in reprinting Sherlock Holmes in a fancy, glorious cover and charging for it at a reasonable profitable price. I think great PD material should continue to be republished, in many formats. I think it is also reasonable to profit from doing so. While these copyfraudsters, if indeed they are, are certainly despicable. Just because they pretend to take something out of PD and copyright it, doesn't stop anyone else from publishing it also. PD works can't really be taken out of PD by fraudulently claiming copyright on them.
I'd love to see a case where one of these fraudsters tried to enforce the copyright on such works. That'd open them up for a whole can of legal hurt.
Maybe they should market condom undies for women and see how they fly? Women could have sex and be protected and never have to take off their undies. Once the sex is over all they have to do is discard the attached condom and replace. It's a win win win win situation.
I think you'll find female condoms, would be as popular as male condoms.
There are numerous reasons why guys don't use condoms. These reasons are commonly known. One you have to carry them around with you and it is something that has to be opened and put on before continuing. Less sensation. Etc. etc. etc.
This has all been covered before in other studies. Hence, it is wasted tax dollars as they will get the same answer they got back in the 50s, 60s, and 70s on the epidemic spread of the (eventually) fatal STD Herpes. There are treatments now that reduce the effects of Herpes. Considering condoms have been around for millennia, and they aren't any more prevalent now as then, I doubt any study has anything NEW to find. Hence if it is unlikely to further the current knowledge, then yes it is wasted government spending. Like spending money trying to determine effect of a bullet to a dog's brain (an actual government funded research project).
The money would be better spent coming up with vaccines for the various STDs. Eliminate the attack vector and you eliminate problem. Trying to get historically proven large proportions of unthinking, uncaring members of the male species to act in any other way than they historically have with the same knowledge is a fruitless waste of time.
I'm married and have no mistress(es) and therefore have no further need for condoms.
So, do you find that the cost of your water and sewer is exorbitant? Or is it more economical to buy your water in bottles and jugs? My water, sewer and trash are all quite efficient and among the cheapest expenses I have. So, a city wants to add citywide internet. It's adds a new competitor. So, competition and choice is good right?
Or has choice made Linux a bad thing?
Who is to say that once the network is built that the city might not contract out the support to competing bidders? Maybe they will bite off more than they can chew. But if they have put in place the hardware and topology, it will have value that they can lease or sell. I can't see a downside to this. They build it and succeed, and everyone gets cheaper faster internet; or they build it and fail and sell/lease it off to some third party who then directly competes with the established players.
Where's the bad in either of those scenarios?
Well the field this article talks about is probably much stronger than a speaker's . Therefore, accordingly, it could have a negative impact on HDDs, if it is more than a a few tens of times stronger. It doesn't need to affect every molecule on a HDD to cause corruption. It only takes one weak spot. Unless you are proposing that a HDD has a perfectly uniform distribution of field strength with no weak spots. Which is fine ...
in theory.
But never occurs in application. I wouldn't feel comfortable having one of these anywhere near my HDD, and even less so near my many memory sticks. Or near my LCD monitors. What if only one in ten thousand bits gets flipped on an HDD, or one in 10 million? Are you really confident that we can produce an HDD that doesn't have 1 weak point every 10,000,000 bits? That's about a 99.99999% manufacturing precision. I'd love to see that. Especially now that densities are getter so much higher. High enough where we are reaching the maximum theoretical density.
This is a bad idea, waiting for a disaster to cause And they're talking about putting these in laptops! Not to mention they are trying to claim IP on this. Even after admitting that Tesla invented it a century ago.
Actually, the law makes it clear that it is a bad as armed robbery of a bank or killing your neighbor. It appears that stealing a car or killing you wife might get you a lighter sentence than getting caught with marijuana.
I have to say your example for a slippery slope argument is bad. I'm actually for random drug testing. I'd like to think that I can feel safe in that some doped out worker didn't assemble my car or a nuclear warhead. I certainly don't want a building full of drunk and high workers at the local Nuclear power plant. You know, just in case something goes wrong, I'd like to think I can feel better that sane, sober and rational workers will be able to solve a problem BEFORE the reactor goes super-critical. Or that the engine won't fall off the jet I'm flying in. And a million other little things like that.
That said, good luck to those geniuses in Montana. They had what maybe ten job applicants? Now they might get two? I can see how this will help them make a hiring decision. How many people live in Bozeman, MT? Yeah, I just love those nice sunny summer days up there. Both of them.
Because reducing the population is a good thing. I say let the Chinese have their custom and the violent population reduction that comes with it. If they are to die then let them die and reduce the surplus population.
Want to grow up to become an athlete? Sorry, your parents couldn't afford to select genes that predispose you to becoming tall / strong / better cardiovascular function.
Or you could do it the old fashioned way and eat healthy, stay away from unhealthy things, work out a lot and practice, practice, practice.
Want to grow up to become a model? Sorry, your parents couldn't afford to give you a slender physique, blond, and blue eyes.
Or you could just become anorexic like all the successful models
Want health insurance? Sure, but it's going to be more expensive because your parents couldn't afford to eliminate your risk of ALS.
Good salient point.
The challenging part is that yeah, if I have the choice to prevent my future kids from developing life-shortening diseases, I've got to do it. Tough ethical choices ahead of us, imho.
I don't see why this is an ethical issue. So people want children with particular traits. Traits that evolutionarily speaking would, most likely, be naturally selected more often than not anyway. Better genes going forward. Or at least the ones that would probably rank higher in desirability, which would be selected more anyway. I mean when the last time you said wow, that is one truly ugly person, I must mate with her/him? Selecting for better, faster, stronger, smarter, better looking, less disease prone mates (and thus hopefully children) is what natural selection is and always has been all about. So now we have a new, improved, tool to help the process along. Where's the moral dilemma? the only worry we should have is governments or religion dictating them, rather than individuals. Oh wait, that's what the Pope is doing! Be afraid, be very afraid.
You're forgetting one minor detail. When there is a shortage of females of a species, the males of that species tend to be more aggressive in obtaining the mating rights to said females. Thus producing a great deal of infighting and killing, and thus restoring the natural balance. See, even throwing in artificially imposed genetic selection, nature will still prevail. At least until the governemnt DNA selects out the aggression gene in all people except the elites.
Besides, I know, and know of, lots of useless males who totally deserve to live and die lonely sexless lives.
God, I hate that euphemism. Slippery slope. Get real people. Everyone already screens for DNA traits. Usually, though, people use secondary evidential characteristics rather than actual scientific DNA traits. I choose the DNA traits for my child. I choose someone who only had blond and red alleles for hair color and blue and green alleles for eye color. I chose the shape of the nose, the skeletal build, intelligence, etc. Ok so not all of my criteria were based on definable genes, but some were. I wound up with a blue-eyed, strawberry blonde, average height, above average intellect child. It's stupid to get upset over choosing eye and hair color.
All this means is that the new questionnaires will include questions like what color is your hair and that of your parents and siblings. Ditto on eye color.
Duh.
The people who want to choose eye color will still be able to, only not quite as foolproof, and the clinics get the DNAnazis off their back.
I totally get wanting to choose an eye and hair color that matches at least one of the parents.
Ah, yes but what do I do in the meantime while waiting for the school district to do their job, while they keep reassuring me they are analyzing the issue?