Finally, the whole deal means that we can now start having safety equipment for our nuclear program, which we haven't been able to obtain for years now.
I'm not going to speculate on how familiar you are with nuclear security in India, but safety concerns are the very first thing any nuclear facility or command structure addresses, and these have been well met. (High level) descriptions of these are available in journals, as well as public documents around the web.
Hmm, what would be interesting is to see numbers of people in *other* years dying of the same causes. Here's a link to the NSC [http://www.nsc.org/lrs/statinfo/odds.htm] on the number of deaths for the year 2006 from most of the above causes.
We already *know*,
- The fact that Web2 is a buzzword.
- That its component technologies have been around for generations.
- That geospatial data is important and will exponentially increase in prominence
- Devices using internet connections coupled with above technology will be a boon to some, and a bane to as many others
- Internet connections aren't upto the last mile yet, and will take some time to get to an "always on" state which we need to exploit the above.
What we're looking to answer is
- When? Who's doing the research, who's doing the groundwork for all this to happen? Google is a given of course, I refer to academic research which people outside of Google R&D can look at and incorporate into.
- How? As above, but with whose funding, which laws, et al?
Dos this sound vague? Of course it does - but the TFA does nothing but rehash what everyone already knows. And thats the reason I considered it a waste d 5 minutes reading it.
..to offer that kind of imagery at the resolutions of 1m or less. There's no way people are going to sell their rights - especially if they're foreign governments.
ISRO (Indian Space Research Organization) is the world's third and only second non-US supplier of 1-m imageries and perhaps the most competitively priced; the data comes at a premium of nearly 40 per cent. Some data is internationally priced at $18-20 per picture of a sq km.
_If_ Harvard ends up resisting. _IF_ Yale joins in. _IF_ Columbia, which was targeted as one of the 12 piracy-propogating schools decides to join on the bandwagon. Who knows, the ivy league might just end up doing something as a team.
Gosh, who here doesn't see Asia - India and China as markets? Sure, the phone is expensive and will take a while to garner acceptance there. But these are places which have almost universally shunned clam shell phones - India RUNS on candy bar phones by Nokia, Sony-Ericsson, and a few others. Touch screens and PDAs are getting more popular there too.
They also have 3G, excellent connectivity where it matters, and IMHO, one of the most perfect markets for a product like this _provided_ its launched with the economies of those places in mind. The dazzling eyecandy will help of course.
.. in which case, how do I jump off the number line and into abstract mathematics? Its all good for assigning a Nullity - which, in Computer Science atleast, has existed as a concept for a long time - but try solving some more interesting mathematical proofs using it.
Another thing which strikes me as suspicious - where is that paper which is going to be published in 2007? Most people release drafts, and in this case, its a paper for Nature which doesn't strike me as something which should be regarded as secret to begin with. No matter which journal you submit a paper to, atleast give the masses some sort of a mathematical idea to balance and probably and even comment on. Not everyone has the patience or the penchance to sit through a RealPlayer video. I wish someone would put it on Youtube..
As someone who works in Robotics, I find this argument quite silly. Before I say why, let me state that Japan put down laws for robots and their interaction with humans a couple of weeks ago, about the time of a conference in Indiana known as the International Conference for Developmental Learning. This conference attracts the best roboticists from the world - some of them the original brains behind the famous japanese robots. Some of them might even have helped draft those laws - in all probability, they did. But the robots and ethics talk in the conference which followed it was nothing but an (almost) empty discussion of matters not likely to crop up in less than 20 years. And none of the roboticists bothered joining in. In fact, most of the audience seemed to consist of people not directly involved in robotics. Why?
The reason no one is concerned about robots going haywire, ethics in relation to robots, and related matters is that all these machines need a huge amount of computing power to achieve even a modicum of intelligence or autonomous action. Case in point - the most intelligent robot you can think of. Leo at MIT is one candidate. Most others tend to be glorified bodies and heads pre programmed to do stuff. Leo needs the equivalent of a 25 node cluster to function properly, and is even then confined to the top of a table. Sure, its expressive. It looks like it can learn from experience. It can do various hand gestures, and movements of all sorts. Great. But the moment you disconnect it from its host computer, its nothing but a glorified toy.
Translate that computing power into something which can be carried around by such an entity - and you're looking at a level of miniaturization I don't supposed possible for another 10 years. And by then, any laws or analysis which is made of these issues are going to be outdated because there is no way such a framework is going to carry on then. Robots may have biological components, they may have human parts, humans may have bionic parts - there are endless combinations of things, most of which wouldn't be visualized today.
As for asimov's 3 laws - no roboticist in the research arena has even thought about incorporating it because they *know* that these robots can do nothing without a lot of support from humans. Coming to the incident with the japanese engineer getting killed - most people would term that as an industrial accident, not the efforts of robots to kill humans. And as for sensors and things - whoever talks about human proximity sensors that advanced existing in industrial robots - does so through a hat.
Don't you guys ever consider the fact that some of these breakthroughs are not built for commercial applications?
Instead of trying to analyze these achievements in the rather constricted mould of "Why not 3D graphics" or "Why not text on a screen", consider the use of this technology in the future - when say, the robots to help disabled people finally get off the assembly lines. By then, this process would've been refined to the point of being able to do an excellent job in communications.
As a researcher in the field of robotics, a lot of work which I do or goes on around me, has definite implications - if not now, atleast in the next decade or so. And don't we owe to ourselves to look at developments such as this just for the *sake of the development itself*?
I'd never thought I'd say this - but this was one of the most insightful articles into life at Apple. I'm not saying its a positive thing, knowing Jobs' famous tantrums and "getting things his way" attitude to whatever he does.
Nevertheless, It is an important aspect of post 1997 Apple, with all their products being released in this fashion, and I guess its important for them to spend so much time rehearsing things - after all, they can't afford to have Gates' fiasco at the Windows 98 launch (When the printer crashed the system on being plugged in!). But whats interesting is that Jobs comes across as a stickler for personalization and perfection - which in my opinion is commendable, when you're holding a job which can often lead to overlooking the finer aspects of things.
No wonder Apple products set the industry standard in terms of looks, design and most of all, presentations.
Um.. I'm not sure what *you're* talking about.
Uniqueness I agree on - but would you actually use something which has close to no manual features to take ultra wide zoom shots, when you can have excellent control with a Single Lens Reflex?
I wouldn't. I'd much rather use a Nikon D-70 or equivalent to do so...
considering that in a recent shootout of cameras which I did to buy my new one, 4 out of 5 models had the above technology. Whats more, they were 7 or 8 mega pixel cameras. My final purchase was a Powershot SD550, which offers excellent manual features and compactness.. and the Kodak mentioned in the article doesn't beat that.
My question - why would you focus on one model, which doesn't offer as much as some others do, and has all its features enveloped by others in the same price range anyway?
that Paul Allen and SpaceshipOne might be just whats needed for privatized space flights to (no pun intended) take off. Why does everyone forget the good stuff like this which Allen's done?
And the good thing is, he funds ventures after deciding "if its something that he would love". I call that a rather smart way of judging what (not) to fund. Granted, that this may at times bump up pet projects when compared to something with a larger impact - but this is needed too! After all, we do have the 2 richest foundations in the world dealing with those issues (Gates and Grove).
I was talking about the tool itself - and I don't think its OSX only. Sarovar hosts GNU projects, and I remember seeing something about its use on Linux and *nix systems. Couldn't be bothered to google when commenting!!
Blacking out or greying out areas is definitely a bad response, considering that it draws more attention to what should probably be kept lying low. As for Security through obscurity - um - what're we talking about here? Is this some sort of algorithm whose mathematical innards are left open for peer review and testing, to prove that its unbreakable? If you were to do that for actual installations - wouldn't that be saying Hi there! This building is open for testing and peer reviews - please come in, try to blow it up, and prove to us that it is indeed secure.
Grow up!
Imo, the whole issue is being grossly overrated. So India forms a committee. Great. They have a bunch of pen pushers trying to think about how the problem should be sorted out - whats to say they won't be able to do it? As someone mentioned above, security in India might look warped, but its one of the most efficient in the world.. and if the same pen pushers can do such a good job doing what they do (albeit with their under-the-table-cuts-and-whatnot), let them do it!
And forget about Google Earth, Terramaps and whatnot - those are just the free services. Commercial satellites could well be leased by certain people who own construction companies making billions in Saudi Arabia - even though they prefer to live in caves. Has anyone thought of putting restrictions on the *Satellites* or the companies which run them?
Well, its about time someone did do it. Its got immense possibilities - but how would music stores react to it? For all you know, they might (as in the case of IE) have ActiveX controls/or propreitary media formats which tell you to go and use their own software.. or activate some locks/feature constrictions which would be solved given time, but would still render the service unusable.
I remember Fairplay (or was it Playfair), the tool which allowed encoded Apple music files to be played on any MP3 player - what a ruckus that caused!
I read about this about 2 days ago though - is this is a sign that/. is falling behind the times?
Slashdot Mirror
I know next to nothing about legalese, but shouldn't this spell out a perfect use-case to launch a class action lawsuit against ATT?
Finally, the whole deal means that we can now start having safety equipment for our nuclear program, which we haven't been able to obtain for years now.
I'm not going to speculate on how familiar you are with nuclear security in India, but safety concerns are the very first thing any nuclear facility or command structure addresses, and these have been well met. (High level) descriptions of these are available in journals, as well as public documents around the web.
Hmm, what would be interesting is to see numbers of people in *other* years dying of the same causes. Here's a link to the NSC [http://www.nsc.org/lrs/statinfo/odds.htm] on the number of deaths for the year 2006 from most of the above causes.
After all, its just a simple window. Shouldn't Ctrl + W work on other machines then?
They're talking a *MacBook* keyboard, not a MBP - the two are fundamentally different. I prefer the MBP keyboard to the MB's myself.
We already *know*,
- The fact that Web2 is a buzzword.
- That its component technologies have been around for generations.
- That geospatial data is important and will exponentially increase in prominence
- Devices using internet connections coupled with above technology will be a boon to some, and a bane to as many others
- Internet connections aren't upto the last mile yet, and will take some time to get to an "always on" state which we need to exploit the above.
What we're looking to answer is
- When? Who's doing the research, who's doing the groundwork for all this to happen? Google is a given of course, I refer to academic research which people outside of Google R&D can look at and incorporate into.
- How? As above, but with whose funding, which laws, et al?
Dos this sound vague? Of course it does - but the TFA does nothing but rehash what everyone already knows. And thats the reason I considered it a waste d 5 minutes reading it.
I know what it is - I didn't see it necessary to highlight this rather obvious point :)
Just because there's no solid date *yet* doesn't mean there is never going to be. I'd be rather wary.
Try Pidgin. I find it much more usable than Gaim, atleast in the UI features.
..to offer that kind of imagery at the resolutions of 1m or less. There's no way people are going to sell their rights - especially if they're foreign governments.
ISRO (Indian Space Research Organization) is the world's third and only second non-US supplier of 1-m imageries and perhaps the most competitively priced; the data comes at a premium of nearly 40 per cent. Some data is internationally priced at $18-20 per picture of a sq km.
From http://www.india-defence.com/reports/3031
Restrictions? Laughable.
_If_ Harvard ends up resisting. _IF_ Yale joins in. _IF_ Columbia, which was targeted as one of the 12 piracy-propogating schools decides to join on the bandwagon. Who knows, the ivy league might just end up doing something as a team.
Those are a lot of big ifs, imho.
Gosh, who here doesn't see Asia - India and China as markets? Sure, the phone is expensive and will take a while to garner acceptance there. But these are places which have almost universally shunned clam shell phones - India RUNS on candy bar phones by Nokia, Sony-Ericsson, and a few others. Touch screens and PDAs are getting more popular there too.
They also have 3G, excellent connectivity where it matters, and IMHO, one of the most perfect markets for a product like this _provided_ its launched with the economies of those places in mind. The dazzling eyecandy will help of course.
.. in which case, how do I jump off the number line and into abstract mathematics? Its all good for assigning a Nullity - which, in Computer Science atleast, has existed as a concept for a long time - but try solving some more interesting mathematical proofs using it. Another thing which strikes me as suspicious - where is that paper which is going to be published in 2007? Most people release drafts, and in this case, its a paper for Nature which doesn't strike me as something which should be regarded as secret to begin with. No matter which journal you submit a paper to, atleast give the masses some sort of a mathematical idea to balance and probably and even comment on. Not everyone has the patience or the penchance to sit through a RealPlayer video. I wish someone would put it on Youtube..
Just adding some stuff here - I've been experimenting over the past couple of weeks and this is what I've foun
* Accounting: GnuCash, KMyMoney, Kalculate
* Project Management - Mr. Project
* Visio equivalent - Kivio, Inkscape, Scribus, Mindmapper tools like kdissert, freemind et al
Just my 2 cents.
As someone who works in Robotics, I find this argument quite silly. Before I say why, let me state that Japan put down laws for robots and their interaction with humans a couple of weeks ago, about the time of a conference in Indiana known as the International Conference for Developmental Learning. This conference attracts the best roboticists from the world - some of them the original brains behind the famous japanese robots. Some of them might even have helped draft those laws - in all probability, they did. But the robots and ethics talk in the conference which followed it was nothing but an (almost) empty discussion of matters not likely to crop up in less than 20 years. And none of the roboticists bothered joining in. In fact, most of the audience seemed to consist of people not directly involved in robotics. Why?
The reason no one is concerned about robots going haywire, ethics in relation to robots, and related matters is that all these machines need a huge amount of computing power to achieve even a modicum of intelligence or autonomous action. Case in point - the most intelligent robot you can think of. Leo at MIT is one candidate. Most others tend to be glorified bodies and heads pre programmed to do stuff. Leo needs the equivalent of a 25 node cluster to function properly, and is even then confined to the top of a table. Sure, its expressive. It looks like it can learn from experience. It can do various hand gestures, and movements of all sorts. Great. But the moment you disconnect it from its host computer, its nothing but a glorified toy.
Translate that computing power into something which can be carried around by such an entity - and you're looking at a level of miniaturization I don't supposed possible for another 10 years. And by then, any laws or analysis which is made of these issues are going to be outdated because there is no way such a framework is going to carry on then. Robots may have biological components, they may have human parts, humans may have bionic parts - there are endless combinations of things, most of which wouldn't be visualized today.
As for asimov's 3 laws - no roboticist in the research arena has even thought about incorporating it because they *know* that these robots can do nothing without a lot of support from humans. Coming to the incident with the japanese engineer getting killed - most people would term that as an industrial accident, not the efforts of robots to kill humans. And as for sensors and things - whoever talks about human proximity sensors that advanced existing in industrial robots - does so through a hat.
But what about oxygen? Won't it be restricted? And if its a blizzard, you can get buried...
lol, anyone notice similarities between the 1HB pencil and the H1B visa?
Don't you guys ever consider the fact that some of these breakthroughs are not built for commercial applications?
Instead of trying to analyze these achievements in the rather constricted mould of "Why not 3D graphics" or "Why not text on a screen", consider the use of this technology in the future - when say, the robots to help disabled people finally get off the assembly lines. By then, this process would've been refined to the point of being able to do an excellent job in communications.
As a researcher in the field of robotics, a lot of work which I do or goes on around me, has definite implications - if not now, atleast in the next decade or so. And don't we owe to ourselves to look at developments such as this just for the *sake of the development itself*?
I'd never thought I'd say this - but this was one of the most insightful articles into life at Apple. I'm not saying its a positive thing, knowing Jobs' famous tantrums and "getting things his way" attitude to whatever he does.
Nevertheless, It is an important aspect of post 1997 Apple, with all their products being released in this fashion, and I guess its important for them to spend so much time rehearsing things - after all, they can't afford to have Gates' fiasco at the Windows 98 launch (When the printer crashed the system on being plugged in!). But whats interesting is that Jobs comes across as a stickler for personalization and perfection - which in my opinion is commendable, when you're holding a job which can often lead to overlooking the finer aspects of things.
No wonder Apple products set the industry standard in terms of looks, design and most of all, presentations.
Um.. I'm not sure what *you're* talking about.
Uniqueness I agree on - but would you actually use something which has close to no manual features to take ultra wide zoom shots, when you can have excellent control with a Single Lens Reflex?
I wouldn't. I'd much rather use a Nikon D-70 or equivalent to do so...
considering that in a recent shootout of cameras which I did to buy my new one, 4 out of 5 models had the above technology. Whats more, they were 7 or 8 mega pixel cameras. My final purchase was a Powershot SD550, which offers excellent manual features and compactness.. and the Kodak mentioned in the article doesn't beat that. My question - why would you focus on one model, which doesn't offer as much as some others do, and has all its features enveloped by others in the same price range anyway?
that Paul Allen and SpaceshipOne might be just whats needed for privatized space flights to (no pun intended) take off. Why does everyone forget the good stuff like this which Allen's done?
And the good thing is, he funds ventures after deciding "if its something that he would love". I call that a rather smart way of judging what (not) to fund. Granted, that this may at times bump up pet projects when compared to something with a larger impact - but this is needed too! After all, we do have the 2 richest foundations in the world dealing with those issues (Gates and Grove).
Playfair - http://sarovar.org/forum/forum.php?forum_id=474
I was talking about the tool itself - and I don't think its OSX only. Sarovar hosts GNU projects, and I remember seeing something about its use on Linux and *nix systems. Couldn't be bothered to google when commenting!!
My 2 cents on the above.
Blacking out or greying out areas is definitely a bad response, considering that it draws more attention to what should probably be kept lying low. As for Security through obscurity - um - what're we talking about here? Is this some sort of algorithm whose mathematical innards are left open for peer review and testing, to prove that its unbreakable? If you were to do that for actual installations - wouldn't that be saying Hi there! This building is open for testing and peer reviews - please come in, try to blow it up, and prove to us that it is indeed secure.
Grow up!
Imo, the whole issue is being grossly overrated. So India forms a committee. Great. They have a bunch of pen pushers trying to think about how the problem should be sorted out - whats to say they won't be able to do it? As someone mentioned above, security in India might look warped, but its one of the most efficient in the world.. and if the same pen pushers can do such a good job doing what they do (albeit with their under-the-table-cuts-and-whatnot), let them do it!
And forget about Google Earth, Terramaps and whatnot - those are just the free services. Commercial satellites could well be leased by certain people who own construction companies making billions in Saudi Arabia - even though they prefer to live in caves. Has anyone thought of putting restrictions on the *Satellites* or the companies which run them?
Well, its about time someone did do it. Its got immense possibilities - but how would music stores react to it? For all you know, they might (as in the case of IE) have ActiveX controls/or propreitary media formats which tell you to go and use their own software.. or activate some locks/feature constrictions which would be solved given time, but would still render the service unusable.
/. is falling behind the times?
I remember Fairplay (or was it Playfair), the tool which allowed encoded Apple music files to be played on any MP3 player - what a ruckus that caused!
I read about this about 2 days ago though - is this is a sign that