The computer display produces 3D images by sending a slightly different image to the right eye and the left eye at once by bending them in different angles, according to Sharp. The special screen has applications in architecture, medicine, science and gaming.
The textured surface I was describing would do exactly what is described in the article.
Speaking of, whey the hell hasn't someone done this?
Exactly. I'm sure there is enough knowledge here to modify an existing graphics engine. I'm sure it'd make a great open source project, or a fair amount of coin for someone.
It's been a long week and forgive me if I'm being overly stupid...
I don't think I follow. I understanding not wanting your personal data available on the WHOIS for general privacy reasons/SPAM etc. If you are marketing shareware/freeware etc specifically, what are the extra implications. Is this simply for tax reasons?
Cheers
I imagine it would probably be more a textured surface that split the image up (much like those old 3D stickers that gave the impression of depth by showing the image at an angle relative to the angle you looked at it). It would be thinner but I don't know if that's actually how it works.
This has been around in print for years now; I guess it was only a matter of time before some bright spark applied it to screens.
I always thought that it would be particularly good for 3D Games.
I know there are a number of organizations who "sell" free software such as Kazaa for a one off or monthly fee. I wonder if they have left themselves liable for misleading the public (claiming for the fee, they provide free music etc)?
I've had to design copy protection systems in the past and I know the balance between security and flexibility is fine.
Like it or not, it's clear that this is the way things are going. There is no easy answer, and I must admit I have some sympathy for the developer (although I do not know what is done with the data when he receives it). The data collected is relevant and useful to an investigation.
Comments like, "it should just disable/uninstall itself," aren't very well thought out.
I agree. The most import reason being you don't want to alienate your clients by accusing them of theft when they could simply have a virus, not installed your software properly etc. A disabled program, or some message stating that the software is stolen will also greatly aid a cracker.
We never crossed the line in having our software phone home, but the code does execute differently when it is a suspect copy. Whenever this was the case we would get a support call. After checking our records and investigating the fault, we would either tell them they had a virus, the software wasn't installed properly, or it wasn't paid for depending on what's wrong. I assume (hopefully correctly) that this is what the developer is also doing.
Casinos use multiple decks for a variety of reasons. I can't remember exactly off the top of my head but as you add more decks to the shoe, the odds become more favourable for the house. The Nevada gaming council requires a minimum deal before reshuffle (last I checked) something like 3 of 4 decks. The way they play at the moment you will only ever see 75% of the cards, thus you will never be able to do "Rain man" style counting.
The idea of basic card counting is that the shoe has either a higher density of high cards, or a lower density of high cards, the extent of this is determined by the count (the difference of high cards and low cards already played) When the count is favourable (the deck is rich in high cards) the dealer is more likely to bust simply because he must draw on any hand under 16 thus the odds are in your favour.
If you are more mathematically minded, there are other counting system you can use (these tend to involve watching for groups of cards and anticipating how the shuffles will redistribute them (most croupiers that I've seen tend to do a more or less perfect faro shuffle)
That's true at some tables, however it's becomming less common these days.
The dealer's hole card has often counted as a weakness because someone behind the dealer could glimpse the hole card when the dealer checks for a blackjack. Many tables now favour dealing two face up cards to the players and one face up card to the dealer. Basically it eliminates the threat of weak dealers, and has the potential for more profit for the casino.
Example: The dealer has a blackjack, everyone looses before the hand starts
or
The dealer has a face card
two players double down, one player splits the dealer takes his second card. Blackjack everyone looses, the casino takes more profit.
The only way this fails is when a player gets a blackjack, but players are much more likely to split and double down, than have a blackjack.
The dealer's hole card has often counted as a weakness because someone behind the dealer could glimpse the hole card when the dealer checks for a blackjack. Many tables now favour dealing two face up cards to the players and one face up card to the dealer. Basically it eliminates the threat of weak dealers, and has the potential for more profit for the casino.
Example:
The dealer has a blackjack, everyone looses before the hand starts
or
The dealer has a face card
two players double down, one player splits
the dealer takes his second card. Blackjack everyone looses, the casino takes more profit.
The only way this fails is when a player gets a blackjack, but players are much more likely to split and double down, than have a blackjack.
There are hundreds of books out there on card counting. Imagine you know nothing about blackjack but you keep hearing about blackjack having the best odds, read one of these books etc and you're off to Vegas...
Several hours later it's a greyhound home...
As long as the casino controls the people who actually know what they are doing, the suckers will dump more than enough to keep the tables profitable.
It seems to me that the marks would be on the face of the cards, as the only face down cards (depending on which style of blackjack you are playing) are in the shoe.
Card counting is not illegal, nor immoral, nor will it make you fat etc etc etc. Casinos are in the business of taking your money and if you win too much money (or more than they think you should be winning) they will ask you to leave (or keep you there until you loose it all)
In blackjack, as the cards are dealt randomly, the odds fluctuate +/- 0.5 between the dealer's favour and the players favour. When you use basic card counting techniques you can tell when the odds are in your favour and bet accordingly. If the cards are continuously kept in circulation, the odds stay slightly in the houses favour.
At the end of the day, for the majority of us here, the house is not going to notice, nor care that we are counting cards because we haven't got the bankroll to do any damage. I can't play and count at the same time so I've had a friend stand behind me and tell me the count after every hand. It pissed them off a bit but nobody really cared that I finished up 100ish.
The house doesn't even give you that. Don't forget that European roulette has a zero and american roulette has a zero and double zero skewing the odds on all the even bets.
I suppose it depends on what you want to drink at the time. I personally find a cold lager very crisp and refreshing, but then again sometimes other times I'll fancy a real ale or stout and probably grumble to myself if it is served too cold, or poured incorrectly...
Besides, if students are learning how to use an OS by rote then everything they know will be useless as soon as MS releases a new version of windows.
TMTOWTDI indeed. I wish MS could decide...
In the context of cryptography, a uniform distribution of numbers can be seen in a weakness of the cryptosystem. Despite not being able to predict the numbers in a sequence, the numbers will all exsist within a limited domain thus making a brute-force attack much more practical.
I seem to remember reading somewhere that, despite the common misconception that 1,2,3,4,5,6 is somehow more random than any other set of numbers, it remains the most common set of numbers to be picked by the punters. So much so that if those numbers ever did come up on a standard 1.5M Jackpot, each winner would recieve (as I recall) around 700 Sterling.
Bummer...
Am I the only one who prefers owning the physical media? I have 9+GB of MP3s and probably less than a dozen of them are from albums I don't own.
The argument that there isn't any good music to buy is bollocks. What was it, 27,000 new titles last year, how about over the last 40 years? I personally find out about new music by talking to friends with similar taste. If I hear about a new band I can download tracks off of Kazaa, and figure out which albums I want to buy (although from the sounds of things, I'm the only one who does this).
All this being said, I do not contibute positively to the RIAA's statistics because I only buy second hand CDs
Does anyone remember the lawsuit between Apple Records and Apple?
I thought they had some aggreement that apple would never get into the recording industry...
Slashdot Mirror
The textured surface I was describing would do exactly what is described in the article.
That's not quite what I was getting at. I understand the personal privacy implications, I just thought I was missing something (I guess not).
Like I said, it's been a long week.
Exactly. I'm sure there is enough knowledge here to modify an existing graphics engine. I'm sure it'd make a great open source project, or a fair amount of coin for someone.
It's been a long week and forgive me if I'm being overly stupid... I don't think I follow. I understanding not wanting your personal data available on the WHOIS for general privacy reasons/SPAM etc. If you are marketing shareware/freeware etc specifically, what are the extra implications. Is this simply for tax reasons? Cheers
I imagine it would probably be more a textured surface that split the image up (much like those old 3D stickers that gave the impression of depth by showing the image at an angle relative to the angle you looked at it). It would be thinner but I don't know if that's actually how it works.
This has been around in print for years now; I guess it was only a matter of time before some bright spark applied it to screens.
I always thought that it would be particularly good for 3D Games.
I know there are a number of organizations who "sell" free software such as Kazaa for a one off or monthly fee. I wonder if they have left themselves liable for misleading the public (claiming for the fee, they provide free music etc)?
I for one would like to see them go down.
Like it or not, it's clear that this is the way things are going. There is no easy answer, and I must admit I have some sympathy for the developer (although I do not know what is done with the data when he receives it). The data collected is relevant and useful to an investigation.
I agree. The most import reason being you don't want to alienate your clients by accusing them of theft when they could simply have a virus, not installed your software properly etc. A disabled program, or some message stating that the software is stolen will also greatly aid a cracker.
We never crossed the line in having our software phone home, but the code does execute differently when it is a suspect copy. Whenever this was the case we would get a support call. After checking our records and investigating the fault, we would either tell them they had a virus, the software wasn't installed properly, or it wasn't paid for depending on what's wrong. I assume (hopefully correctly) that this is what the developer is also doing.
And they thought nobody would ever know they opened the network to play Quake...
Casinos use multiple decks for a variety of reasons. I can't remember exactly off the top of my head but as you add more decks to the shoe, the odds become more favourable for the house. The Nevada gaming council requires a minimum deal before reshuffle (last I checked) something like 3 of 4 decks. The way they play at the moment you will only ever see 75% of the cards, thus you will never be able to do "Rain man" style counting.
The idea of basic card counting is that the shoe has either a higher density of high cards, or a lower density of high cards, the extent of this is determined by the count (the difference of high cards and low cards already played) When the count is favourable (the deck is rich in high cards) the dealer is more likely to bust simply because he must draw on any hand under 16 thus the odds are in your favour.
If you are more mathematically minded, there are other counting system you can use (these tend to involve watching for groups of cards and anticipating how the shuffles will redistribute them (most croupiers that I've seen tend to do a more or less perfect faro shuffle)
Someday I'll learn to preview *grumble*
That's true at some tables, however it's becomming less common these days.
The dealer's hole card has often counted as a weakness because someone behind the dealer could glimpse the hole card when the dealer checks for a blackjack. Many tables now favour dealing two face up cards to the players and one face up card to the dealer. Basically it eliminates the threat of weak dealers, and has the potential for more profit for the casino.
Example:
The dealer has a blackjack, everyone looses before the hand starts
or
The dealer has a face card
two players double down, one player splits
the dealer takes his second card. Blackjack everyone looses, the casino takes more profit.
The only way this fails is when a player gets a blackjack, but players are much more likely to split and double down, than have a blackjack.
The dealer's hole card has often counted as a weakness because someone behind the dealer could glimpse the hole card when the dealer checks for a blackjack. Many tables now favour dealing two face up cards to the players and one face up card to the dealer. Basically it eliminates the threat of weak dealers, and has the potential for more profit for the casino. Example: The dealer has a blackjack, everyone looses before the hand starts or The dealer has a face card two players double down, one player splits the dealer takes his second card. Blackjack everyone looses, the casino takes more profit. The only way this fails is when a player gets a blackjack, but players are much more likely to split and double down, than have a blackjack.
There are hundreds of books out there on card counting. Imagine you know nothing about blackjack but you keep hearing about blackjack having the best odds, read one of these books etc and you're off to Vegas...
Several hours later it's a greyhound home...
As long as the casino controls the people who actually know what they are doing, the suckers will dump more than enough to keep the tables profitable.
It seems to me that the marks would be on the face of the cards, as the only face down cards (depending on which style of blackjack you are playing) are in the shoe.
Card counting is not illegal, nor immoral, nor will it make you fat etc etc etc. Casinos are in the business of taking your money and if you win too much money (or more than they think you should be winning) they will ask you to leave (or keep you there until you loose it all)
In blackjack, as the cards are dealt randomly, the odds fluctuate +/- 0.5 between the dealer's favour and the players favour. When you use basic card counting techniques you can tell when the odds are in your favour and bet accordingly. If the cards are continuously kept in circulation, the odds stay slightly in the houses favour.
At the end of the day, for the majority of us here, the house is not going to notice, nor care that we are counting cards because we haven't got the bankroll to do any damage. I can't play and count at the same time so I've had a friend stand behind me and tell me the count after every hand. It pissed them off a bit but nobody really cared that I finished up 100ish.
He's right. The only face down cards are in the shoe.
The house doesn't even give you that. Don't forget that European roulette has a zero and american roulette has a zero and double zero skewing the odds on all the even bets.
I suppose it depends on what you want to drink at the time. I personally find a cold lager very crisp and refreshing, but then again sometimes other times I'll fancy a real ale or stout and probably grumble to myself if it is served too cold, or poured incorrectly...
Besides, if students are learning how to use an OS by rote then everything they know will be useless as soon as MS releases a new version of windows. TMTOWTDI indeed. I wish MS could decide...
In the context of cryptography, a uniform distribution of numbers can be seen in a weakness of the cryptosystem. Despite not being able to predict the numbers in a sequence, the numbers will all exsist within a limited domain thus making a brute-force attack much more practical.
I seem to remember reading somewhere that, despite the common misconception that 1,2,3,4,5,6 is somehow more random than any other set of numbers, it remains the most common set of numbers to be picked by the punters. So much so that if those numbers ever did come up on a standard 1.5M Jackpot, each winner would recieve (as I recall) around 700 Sterling.
Bummer...
Am I the only one who prefers owning the physical media? I have 9+GB of MP3s and probably less than a dozen of them are from albums I don't own.
The argument that there isn't any good music to buy is bollocks. What was it, 27,000 new titles last year, how about over the last 40 years? I personally find out about new music by talking to friends with similar taste. If I hear about a new band I can download tracks off of Kazaa, and figure out which albums I want to buy (although from the sounds of things, I'm the only one who does this).
All this being said, I do not contibute positively to the RIAA's statistics because I only buy second hand CDs
Does anyone remember the lawsuit between Apple Records and Apple?
I thought they had some aggreement that apple would never get into the recording industry...