It's worth noting that the U.S. has no federal copyright-like "publicity right". Authors have copyright, and inventors have patents, but the Copyright & Patent Clause does not authorize any other kind of IP.
California, on the other hand, has a specific law granting celebrities exclusive use over their likenesses. Since it's a state law, in a federal court it prevails unless either it's preempted by a federal law under the preemption doctrine, or violates an incorporated-against-the-states right of the people, such as First Amendment. Here, the court held that California's law didn't violate the First Amendment.
That isn't good, but it doesn't actually mean that celebrities have some kind of inherent or national right to control their likenesses. States which disagree with this kind of outcome should make sure they repeal, or don't pass in the first place, laws like California's.
It's a bit complex, because the retina doesn't really have a static resolution: it integrates information from constant movements, responses nonlinearly to different patterns of photon impacts, and has different sensitivies across different parts. You could put a ballpark number on it, but it's difficult to really sort out what the "resolution of the retina" is.
To quote a paper:
Many would say that new display technologies, 9 megapixel panels and projectors for example, are coming ever closer to “matching the resolution of the human eye”, but how does one measure this, and in what areas are current displays and rendering techniques still lacking? [...] The resolution perceived by the eye involves both spatial and temporal derivatives of the scene; even if the image is not moving, the eye is (“drifts”), but previous attempts to characterize the resolution requirements of the human eye generally have not taken this into account. Thus our photon model explicitly simulates the image effects of drifts via motion blur techniques; we believe that this effect when combined with the spatial derivatives of receptive fields is a necessary component of building a deep quantitative model of the eye’s ability to perceive resolution in display devices.
You retrain that person for something more in demand. Of course, this requires your welfare system to not suck, and to include an educational component (Denmark has free university, and also has free continuing education to retrain unemployed workers).
The U.S. could do it better, if anything, since it has some economies of scale. The main advantage being small gives Denmark isn't efficiency, but social cohesion to allow it to set up such a system in the first place: people actually feel responsible for the progress of the country, not just getting themselves rich.
Many people not particularly interested in science have some passing interest in what scientists have found, which is what the popular press is often going for. Less "how does quantum mechanics work?" and more "how did humans evolve?", "does [X] give me cancer?" and "what is anthropogenic global warming?".
For me this depends on the area. In many parts of CS, you can safely ignore the equations, because they end up being needlessly tedious formalizations of something that was already said in two sentences, and proofs of trivial properties by structural induction. I guess there's a certain "nice to be sure" aspect of restating even straightfoward things with symbols, but rather than having them in the paper, in those cases I'd rather their proofs be formalized in Coq or Isabelle or something and included a checkable appendix. Proofs of obvious properties that are verbose and formal, but not actually formally checkable, occupy a sort of worst-of-both-worlds no-man's land.
If you raised the price of labor to $20/hour, then Amazon would use more automation.
And that'd probably be a net good for the economy, moving it higher-tech, and creating better jobs in tech than the ones automated away. Unless you're a Luddite who thinks automation is bad and we should keep all jobs manual forever.
The $20/hr minimum wage in Denmark is a big boost to innovation and the country's economy, for example.
The main reason it was rejected appears to be that its claims were anticipated by patent 7,724,242. But now that patent still covers a pretty wide range of the same things, and is still valid (at least so far).
I think JSTOR was taken aback by their sudden role in the case and has made some good moves since (starting with the decision to oppose prosecution in that case).
There are a substantial number of librarians there, who tend to have fairly civic-minded views, and see themselves as on the pro-information-dissemination side of things. The main counteracting forces are: 1) for post-1923 journals, the journals rather than JSTOR ultimately own the copyright, so JSTOR has to work with them to be allowed to digitize them at all (and has perhaps in the past been too deferential to their views); and 2) as a slow-moving, somewhat conservative institution, they're focused more on traditional archival questions like how to preserve things for posterity, and what kinds of revenue streams will support that, and less on broadening current access.
In the time since the Swartz case, they have made all out-of-copyright issues freely available, which is a move they could make unilaterally, and is a big increase in the amount of old journal content now available online, in high-quality scans with good metadata.
Beyond the fate of Private Manning as an individual, the 'aiding the enemy' charge — unprecedented in a leak case — could have significant long-term ramifications for investigative journalism in the Internet era.
Since he was acquitted of the charge, isn't that particular kind of potential ramification now less dire? It doesn't prove that the government will never be able to overreach in that manner, but the fact that they couldn't get a conviction on that charge here, even in a military court and little dispute about the underlying facts of document release, suggests that it won't be that easy.
I especially don't see how it makes sense to have a common tagging system across completely different use-cases. Why would Slashdot stories and Flickr photos use the same approach to tags? For those of us who research AI, it might be nice: if humans would just cleanly place everything they do into one consistent global semantic structure, it'd sure solve some of our difficult problems, by defining them as someone else's responsibility to sort out. But that doesn't seem like a great justification, or a realistic proposal.
Adding restrictions on imports deliberately removes Australia from global pricing from software and sets it up as a segmented market, so it's not a huge surprise that companies like Adobe then set prices within the segmented market differently, to optimize profits in that market.
You'd probably see it in the U.S., too, if it were possible to have segmented pricing between states: Adobe would charge higher prices in CA and NY.
Most western-designed machines also have final assembly in China, in addition to the components mostly being made in China. For example, HP assembles many of its laptops in Chongqing in a joint facility.
There might be some difference, since the design is done by HP, and they oversee the production to try to ensure it's in accordance with their design. I'm not sure how much of a barrier to slipping something in that provides, but it might be nonzero.
These numbers may not make sense to everyone and if we translate them to ‘English’, Samsung means that these chips will provide better multitasking, browsing, HD video recording, gaming, file transfers – all in all a performance boost as compared to today’s chips.
A better translation could be to give me some information about what the current marketplace looks like. If it's the "fastest embedded memory", is that because it's 20% faster than the existing parts? 2% faster?
Was noted in actual weather systems as well (at least as far as we understand them), which is part of what makes it particularly tricky to avoid in simulations. It's not only that our hurricane track models, for example, are sensitively dependent on parameters, but also that real hurricane trajectories appear to be sensitively dependent on surrounding conditions.
The demand for conspicuous consumption among newly wealthy Chinese is even changing some of the retail market in Europe. Chinese tourists in Europe buy much more stuff than European and American tourists do, especially of the expensive stuff. So London high-street stores and French luxury-goods stores are retargeting their sales to aim more at Chinese. There are even luxury-shopping tours where you fly from China to Paris and get taken around to Louis Vuitton and the like, as a package deal (I guess you probably do also see the Eiffel Tower).
Sure, but that only changes the binary choice into a somewhat finer-grained choice of which of the two coalitions you want to vote for. The next PM is exceedingly likely to come from either the Labor or the Liberal party, so if you vote for a third party, you're still indirectly voting for one of those two as PM as well, depending on which third party you choose. For example, if you vote LNP or National, you're voting for a Liberal PM, since those parties support the Liberal Party in coalition.
Yeah, the standard solution in the humanities right now is basically a person who will laboriously reformat your Word document into the journal's layout, usually using something like Adobe InDesign.
This often produces nice-looking typesetting done by a professional, but it's expensive and one barrier to making things go open-access. If you're in a field where you can expect people to do their own typesetting in LaTeX, then you can run a no-expenses journal.
It's confusingly written, but the blurb (and story) are just using him as the hook. The rest of the story is about Australian politics.
The premise seems to be something like this:
1. Heard about this guy Matthew Weaver, who's been in the news after he was convicted of rigging student elections in California?
2. Well, on that subject, did you know that a bunch of current Australian politicians also have a background rigging student elections back in their college days?
According to his LinkedIn, maynard was a sysadmin in MIT's Laboratory for Nuclear Science, and while there, graduated from neighboring Harvard with a liberal-arts degree, presumably through nights-and-weekends courses.
Re:It was originally a pretty good design
on
Windows NT Turns 20
·
· Score: 4, Informative
I've heard there are still places running VMS-based hardware.
Hell, VMS-on-VAX was Digital's replacement for the PDP line of minicomputers (phased in in 1977), and even their predecessors are still running in a few places.
For something Dropbox-like in UI that you can point to your own servers, some options are:
* Git-Annex Assistant: Despite its name, git is sort of an implementation detail you can ignore. It doesn't actually revision-control all your files, so you don't get huge bloat with binary files that are edited. One nice thing it does is integrate syncing with offline storage, so you can e.g. set up a remote server to sync to live, *and* set up a USB-connected hard drive to sync to when it's attached. When the USB drive is offline git-annex will still remember what files were on it.
* Sparkleshare: a front-end that does version-control all your files, which might be preferable if you are sharing small-ish files where you might want to recover a previous version (e.g., text documents). Less good than Git-Annex Assistant if you're sharing huge media files, possibly better if you aren't.
Slashdot Mirror
[Reply to self]
Oops, I linked the amendment to the California law that strengthened it, rather than the law itself. Here's the full codified law.
It's worth noting that the U.S. has no federal copyright-like "publicity right". Authors have copyright, and inventors have patents, but the Copyright & Patent Clause does not authorize any other kind of IP.
California, on the other hand, has a specific law granting celebrities exclusive use over their likenesses. Since it's a state law, in a federal court it prevails unless either it's preempted by a federal law under the preemption doctrine, or violates an incorporated-against-the-states right of the people, such as First Amendment. Here, the court held that California's law didn't violate the First Amendment.
That isn't good, but it doesn't actually mean that celebrities have some kind of inherent or national right to control their likenesses. States which disagree with this kind of outcome should make sure they repeal, or don't pass in the first place, laws like California's.
It's a bit complex, because the retina doesn't really have a static resolution: it integrates information from constant movements, responses nonlinearly to different patterns of photon impacts, and has different sensitivies across different parts. You could put a ballpark number on it, but it's difficult to really sort out what the "resolution of the retina" is.
To quote a paper:
Pretty interesting stuff, from a project that tried to build a photon-accurate model of the human eye.
You retrain that person for something more in demand. Of course, this requires your welfare system to not suck, and to include an educational component (Denmark has free university, and also has free continuing education to retrain unemployed workers).
The U.S. could do it better, if anything, since it has some economies of scale. The main advantage being small gives Denmark isn't efficiency, but social cohesion to allow it to set up such a system in the first place: people actually feel responsible for the progress of the country, not just getting themselves rich.
Many people not particularly interested in science have some passing interest in what scientists have found, which is what the popular press is often going for. Less "how does quantum mechanics work?" and more "how did humans evolve?", "does [X] give me cancer?" and "what is anthropogenic global warming?".
For me this depends on the area. In many parts of CS, you can safely ignore the equations, because they end up being needlessly tedious formalizations of something that was already said in two sentences, and proofs of trivial properties by structural induction. I guess there's a certain "nice to be sure" aspect of restating even straightfoward things with symbols, but rather than having them in the paper, in those cases I'd rather their proofs be formalized in Coq or Isabelle or something and included a checkable appendix. Proofs of obvious properties that are verbose and formal, but not actually formally checkable, occupy a sort of worst-of-both-worlds no-man's land.
Putting a probability on a normative claim being true is interesting. You must be one of them Bayesians.
If you raised the price of labor to $20/hour, then Amazon would use more automation.
And that'd probably be a net good for the economy, moving it higher-tech, and creating better jobs in tech than the ones automated away. Unless you're a Luddite who thinks automation is bad and we should keep all jobs manual forever.
The $20/hr minimum wage in Denmark is a big boost to innovation and the country's economy, for example.
The main reason it was rejected appears to be that its claims were anticipated by patent 7,724,242. But now that patent still covers a pretty wide range of the same things, and is still valid (at least so far).
And if we look at who filed that patent, it's two people whose names appear at the list of Senior Inventors of everyone's favorite litigious organization that doesn't technically hold patents itself...
I think JSTOR was taken aback by their sudden role in the case and has made some good moves since (starting with the decision to oppose prosecution in that case).
There are a substantial number of librarians there, who tend to have fairly civic-minded views, and see themselves as on the pro-information-dissemination side of things. The main counteracting forces are: 1) for post-1923 journals, the journals rather than JSTOR ultimately own the copyright, so JSTOR has to work with them to be allowed to digitize them at all (and has perhaps in the past been too deferential to their views); and 2) as a slow-moving, somewhat conservative institution, they're focused more on traditional archival questions like how to preserve things for posterity, and what kinds of revenue streams will support that, and less on broadening current access.
In the time since the Swartz case, they have made all out-of-copyright issues freely available, which is a move they could make unilaterally, and is a big increase in the amount of old journal content now available online, in high-quality scans with good metadata.
Since he was acquitted of the charge, isn't that particular kind of potential ramification now less dire? It doesn't prove that the government will never be able to overreach in that manner, but the fact that they couldn't get a conviction on that charge here, even in a military court and little dispute about the underlying facts of document release, suggests that it won't be that easy.
I especially don't see how it makes sense to have a common tagging system across completely different use-cases. Why would Slashdot stories and Flickr photos use the same approach to tags? For those of us who research AI, it might be nice: if humans would just cleanly place everything they do into one consistent global semantic structure, it'd sure solve some of our difficult problems, by defining them as someone else's responsibility to sort out. But that doesn't seem like a great justification, or a realistic proposal.
Adding restrictions on imports deliberately removes Australia from global pricing from software and sets it up as a segmented market, so it's not a huge surprise that companies like Adobe then set prices within the segmented market differently, to optimize profits in that market.
You'd probably see it in the U.S., too, if it were possible to have segmented pricing between states: Adobe would charge higher prices in CA and NY.
Most western-designed machines also have final assembly in China, in addition to the components mostly being made in China. For example, HP assembles many of its laptops in Chongqing in a joint facility.
There might be some difference, since the design is done by HP, and they oversee the production to try to ensure it's in accordance with their design. I'm not sure how much of a barrier to slipping something in that provides, but it might be nonzero.
A better translation could be to give me some information about what the current marketplace looks like. If it's the "fastest embedded memory", is that because it's 20% faster than the existing parts? 2% faster?
Was noted in actual weather systems as well (at least as far as we understand them), which is part of what makes it particularly tricky to avoid in simulations. It's not only that our hurricane track models, for example, are sensitively dependent on parameters, but also that real hurricane trajectories appear to be sensitively dependent on surrounding conditions.
The demand for conspicuous consumption among newly wealthy Chinese is even changing some of the retail market in Europe. Chinese tourists in Europe buy much more stuff than European and American tourists do, especially of the expensive stuff. So London high-street stores and French luxury-goods stores are retargeting their sales to aim more at Chinese. There are even luxury-shopping tours where you fly from China to Paris and get taken around to Louis Vuitton and the like, as a package deal (I guess you probably do also see the Eiffel Tower).
Sure, but that only changes the binary choice into a somewhat finer-grained choice of which of the two coalitions you want to vote for. The next PM is exceedingly likely to come from either the Labor or the Liberal party, so if you vote for a third party, you're still indirectly voting for one of those two as PM as well, depending on which third party you choose. For example, if you vote LNP or National, you're voting for a Liberal PM, since those parties support the Liberal Party in coalition.
Yeah, the standard solution in the humanities right now is basically a person who will laboriously reformat your Word document into the journal's layout, usually using something like Adobe InDesign.
This often produces nice-looking typesetting done by a professional, but it's expensive and one barrier to making things go open-access. If you're in a field where you can expect people to do their own typesetting in LaTeX, then you can run a no-expenses journal.
It's confusingly written, but the blurb (and story) are just using him as the hook. The rest of the story is about Australian politics.
The premise seems to be something like this:
1. Heard about this guy Matthew Weaver, who's been in the news after he was convicted of rigging student elections in California?
2. Well, on that subject, did you know that a bunch of current Australian politicians also have a background rigging student elections back in their college days?
Yeah, but the only alternative is the "Liberal Party", which has nothing liberal about it.
It's like roff, but better.
According to his LinkedIn, maynard was a sysadmin in MIT's Laboratory for Nuclear Science, and while there, graduated from neighboring Harvard with a liberal-arts degree, presumably through nights-and-weekends courses.
I've heard there are still places running VMS-based hardware.
Hell, VMS-on-VAX was Digital's replacement for the PDP line of minicomputers (phased in in 1977), and even their predecessors are still running in a few places.
For something Dropbox-like in UI that you can point to your own servers, some options are:
* Git-Annex Assistant: Despite its name, git is sort of an implementation detail you can ignore. It doesn't actually revision-control all your files, so you don't get huge bloat with binary files that are edited. One nice thing it does is integrate syncing with offline storage, so you can e.g. set up a remote server to sync to live, *and* set up a USB-connected hard drive to sync to when it's attached. When the USB drive is offline git-annex will still remember what files were on it.
* Sparkleshare: a front-end that does version-control all your files, which might be preferable if you are sharing small-ish files where you might want to recover a previous version (e.g., text documents). Less good than Git-Annex Assistant if you're sharing huge media files, possibly better if you aren't.
See also this Slashdot discussion from two years ago.