That all said if 100 people rip an MP3 or DivX file they won't generate the same byte-identical file. This is doomed to fail at the expense of your computer's CPU cycles as it generates these useless hashes.
OK, I have a better idea.
In order to check whether any of the porn files on kazaa (or wherever) are identical to copyrighted porn, all we need is someone who watches all the porn on kazaa and then compares is with their library of copyrighted porn.
Yes. People should be free [and] suffer the consequences.
A valid viewpoint, but one that I disagree with, because the consequences are frequently (at least partially) shared.
attempts to get someone to pay for that injury should be denied.
Incompatible with free universal healthcare, which I happen to be in favour of...(although that's not really the point here)
This is a much more complicated issue that the previous two. You'll have to be more specific. Barring that, you are making an excluded middle argument.
Why is it different? The effect of spending time and money on maintainance on ticket prices is a factor in competition. How much time and money to spend on it is an arbitrary choice, but most countries (the wealthy ones, basically) set minimum levels. In a truly "free" economy there would be no minimum, and passengers could choose whether to pay more to fly in safer planes or not to. You can have all the middle ground you want, but it's a cut-throat business...and surely that engine's good for another 1000 miles....
How about this: the state will not punish any individual's action which does not deprive any other individual of life, liberty, or property. Can we agree on that?
Directly or indirectly? Someone has to mop up the blood. People causing themselves harm frequently incur a cost to society doing so. (No man is an island, if you'll excuse the platitude).
I agree, but I see this as a non-sequitur.
If I'd said "no convincing reason not to make it mandatory", would you still agree? Or still see it as a non-sequitur?
Don't they have freedom of religion in Austraila?!!!!
No. Australia is ruled by H.M. QE2, D.G.R., F.D. The F.D. means "fidei defendrix", or "defender of the faith". This is her defending the faith against the evil god goatse.
If you're one of these people who wants to live in a cotton wool nanny state then fine , but most people don't.
Ah, the "nanny state", that favourite bogeyman of the right.
Do you think mandatory seatbelts constitute "nannying"? Do you thing motorcyclists have a "right" to drive around without crash helmets?
Or do you think airline safety requirements are "nannying", and airlines should be able to skimp on maintainance checks and "pass the savings on to customers" (call it "self-regulation")?
There's a wide gulf between anarchy and a police state, and people will naturally disagree on where
the ideal middle ground lies. But if a traffic control system could be devised by which cars are automatically driven to the specified destination, and which drastically reduces the likelihood of accidents, I find it hard to come up with a convincing reason not to implement it.
You don't have a "right" to endanger people, and compared to such a (hypothetical, of course) system driving yourself would be just that.
I guess it depends on whether you think "dealing with something" means "doing something about it", or "shrug, blame fate and hope it doesn't happen to you". I prefer the former.
What I meant was that these tracks are emitting very little electromagnetic radiation power relative to the electrical power being being pumped into them. The vast majority of the power ends up being driven into the train motion or wasted as heat.
OK, gotcha. A more, or less (depending on your viewpoint) effective design.
Basically, a small magnet under the train makes a poor antenna for wavelengths this long.
Yup. The Transrapid FAQ claims that the main reason the Shinkansen emits 1,000 times more EM power (and isn't safe for pacemaker users) is that it "flies" at 10cm "altitude" as opposed to the Transrapid's 8-10mm - much better antenna.
Thinking about it more, I'd speculate that there's actually a lot more EMF power emitted from the power supply cables than from the magnets, since these would have a fluctuating current in wires stretching out over miles. At these wavelenghts, those long cables would much more efficiently couple to free space.
...which is probably the reason why the current regulator goes at 100kHz.
it's changing, but not "rapidly" relative to most EMF fields. [...] The wavelength of these waves would be dozens of miles long, so concentrated localized effects would be unlikely.
270Hz apparently. Not exactly VHF, I agree...but still a lot more than AC current. And yes, you'd need a VERY big antenna to detect them.
Moreover, the power of electromagnetic waves depends on the frequency.
And the amplitude (field strength)...it can't just depend on frequency, otherwise you'd be saying "blue light is always brighter than red light"
The total power emitted by these fields would be very low relative to something like a megahertz radio transmitter driven with the same power input.
Huh? Power in = power out. (obviously the higher freq. attenuates faster and needs more input power to achieve the same field strength at greater distances, so its power would be dissipated in a smaller volume)
Yes, but you only get the EM radiation when the fields are changing, rapidly.
They better change rapidly, unless you're suggesting the entire system is propelled by a huge bar magnet strapped to the bottom of the train and one at each end of the track.
It's not like your fridge magnet is sending out microwaves...
It is really very sad to view art in this fashion, as if art was only made for profit.
I agree, but...
It would be much more realistic to think, "I'll try to be a painter and be very poor". Real artists make art because they are compelled to do so, and simply love creating.
...many artists DON'T make art even if they would rather do so, because they like to eat and can't live off their art. Poverty is not a popular choice to make. So the ability to live off their art does make it a lot easier for people to produce art - and that is what copyright was invented for in the first place.
Given that those simulators are typically for large cargo ships, which have to concern themselves with obstacles at distances measured in miles, it's probably not a big issue.
It is if you're manoeuvering into a harbour... (I think the sims are also used for the tugs that have that job, and they definitely need to know where they are to within a metre!)
Is this the first time a software developer has expressly relinquished copyright for abandonware? Of course, eCos was never proprietary, so it's not quite the same...
We have some ship simulators. The largest has 360 deg. view generated by 10 pc's.
You mean ship bridge simulators, that simulate what you can see from the windows? Those are cool.:)
Although I wonder, do people lose the instinct to perspective-adjust after a while? What I mean is, if I see something but can't make it out clearly, I would probably move my head to the side a bit to see it from a different angle and with a different LOS to separate objects in projection. Presumably you're just simulating the LOS to the centre of the bridge so that won't help (the view stays the same), but do people have to "un-learn" that habit first? Or does it not happen?
a huge system to turn all the unstructured info on the web into structured data
In order to do this, they will use a scheme by which each document is referred to by a string including the transfer protocol, the host name, and a file path.
Slashdot Mirror
OK, I have a better idea.
In order to check whether any of the porn files on kazaa (or wherever) are identical to copyrighted porn, all we need is someone who watches all the porn on kazaa and then compares is with their library of copyrighted porn.
Can I have the job?
Also, the competition will drive down prices to where the ordinary person will be able to afford health care.
As long as they only get "ordinarily" ill. Of course poor people had better watch out they never catch anything more than a cold...
A valid viewpoint, but one that I disagree with, because the consequences are frequently (at least partially) shared.
attempts to get someone to pay for that injury should be denied.
Incompatible with free universal healthcare, which I happen to be in favour of...(although that's not really the point here)
This is a much more complicated issue that the previous two. You'll have to be more specific. Barring that, you are making an excluded middle argument.
Why is it different? The effect of spending time and money on maintainance on ticket prices is a factor in competition. How much time and money to spend on it is an arbitrary choice, but most countries (the wealthy ones, basically) set minimum levels. In a truly "free" economy there would be no minimum, and passengers could choose whether to pay more to fly in safer planes or not to. You can have all the middle ground you want, but it's a cut-throat business...and surely that engine's good for another 1000 miles....
How about this: the state will not punish any individual's action which does not deprive any other individual of life, liberty, or property. Can we agree on that?
Directly or indirectly? Someone has to mop up the blood. People causing themselves harm frequently incur a cost to society doing so. (No man is an island, if you'll excuse the platitude).
I agree, but I see this as a non-sequitur.
If I'd said "no convincing reason not to make it mandatory", would you still agree? Or still see it as a non-sequitur?
No. Australia is ruled by H.M. QE2, D.G.R., F.D. The F.D. means "fidei defendrix", or "defender of the faith". This is her defending the faith against the evil god goatse.
Yeah, we all know incrementing the version number is the true path to software greatness!
Still a long way to catch up with windows 2002.0.03 though...
this post brought to you by RC v0.972.5642.pre-25-rc7
Ah, the "nanny state", that favourite bogeyman of the right.
Do you think mandatory seatbelts constitute "nannying"?
Do you thing motorcyclists have a "right" to drive around without crash helmets?
Or do you think airline safety requirements are "nannying", and airlines should be able to skimp on maintainance checks and "pass the savings on to customers" (call it "self-regulation")?
There's a wide gulf between anarchy and a police state, and people will naturally disagree on where the ideal middle ground lies. But if a traffic control system could be devised by which cars are automatically driven to the specified destination, and which drastically reduces the likelihood of accidents, I find it hard to come up with a convincing reason not to implement it.
You don't have a "right" to endanger people, and compared to such a (hypothetical, of course) system driving yourself would be just that.
I guess it depends on whether you think "dealing with something" means "doing something about it", or "shrug, blame fate and hope it doesn't happen to you". I prefer the former.
OK, gotcha. A more, or less (depending on your viewpoint) effective design.
Basically, a small magnet under the train makes a poor antenna for wavelengths this long.
Yup. The Transrapid FAQ claims that the main reason the Shinkansen emits 1,000 times more EM power (and isn't safe for pacemaker users) is that it "flies" at 10cm "altitude" as opposed to the Transrapid's 8-10mm - much better antenna.
Thinking about it more, I'd speculate that there's actually a lot more EMF power emitted from the power supply cables than from the magnets, since these would have a fluctuating current in wires stretching out over miles. At these wavelenghts, those long cables would much more efficiently couple to free space.
This is a bad thing how, give that you already pay road tax? You use the road more, you pay more. Sounds fair.
Given that every day in the UK, 10 people die in traffic accidents and 100 are injured, I'd say they're on to something.
270Hz apparently. Not exactly VHF, I agree...but still a lot more than AC current. And yes, you'd need a VERY big antenna to detect them.
Moreover, the power of electromagnetic waves depends on the frequency.
And the amplitude (field strength)...it can't just depend on frequency, otherwise you'd be saying "blue light is always brighter than red light"
The total power emitted by these fields would be very low relative to something like a megahertz radio transmitter driven with the same power input.
Huh? Power in = power out. (obviously the higher freq. attenuates faster and needs more input power to achieve the same field strength at greater distances, so its power would be dissipated in a smaller volume)
Or 192.47594 assyrian cubits per blink.
(http://www.chemie.de/tools/units.php3 is your friend)
They better change rapidly, unless you're suggesting the entire system is propelled by a huge bar magnet strapped to the bottom of the train and one at each end of the track.
It's not like your fridge magnet is sending out microwaves...
My fridge magnet doesn't move at 430kph, either.
Blasphemer! Bow down and worship Pengra, the Baby Penguin God.
ssssh! It's called "money sharing". Money wants to be free!
Oh, THAT's what CSS is about! I always wondered how anyone could come up with such a bizarre "encryption" scheme.
Are you swedish by any chance, or what's the thing about wise-ass kids in sweden?
I agree, but...
It would be much more realistic to think, "I'll try to be a painter and be very poor". Real artists make art because they are compelled to do so, and simply love creating.
Ummm, actually, quite a few. Mostly from Chinese people using OE, must be a default setting in the localised version.
It is if you're manoeuvering into a harbour... (I think the sims are also used for the tugs that have that job, and they definitely need to know where they are to within a metre!)
Is this the first time a software developer has expressly relinquished copyright for abandonware? Of course, eCos was never proprietary, so it's not quite the same...
You mean ship bridge simulators, that simulate what you can see from the windows? Those are cool. :)
Although I wonder, do people lose the instinct to perspective-adjust after a while? What I mean is, if I see something but can't make it out clearly, I would probably move my head to the side a bit to see it from a different angle and with a different LOS to separate objects in projection. Presumably you're just simulating the LOS to the centre of the bridge so that won't help (the view stays the same), but do people have to "un-learn" that habit first? Or does it not happen?
Well, since your peripheral vision FOV is about 180degs, if the perspective correction is done right you only need to roll your eyeballs. ;)
That's what, 25dpi? each pixel is 1mm x 1mm large? that must look pretty from up close...
Damn, I sure hope mobile phones with 2" screens don't weigh 2kg!
In order to do this, they will use a scheme by which each document is referred to by a string including the transfer protocol, the host name, and a file path.
oh, wait...