Re:you can't trust pictures, anyway
on
Live or Memorex?
·
· Score: 2
The problem is, of course, that of finding a way between extracting the interesting stuff and changing what was said. Such an interview probably takes several hours, it takes some time for the interviewee to "warm up", there are misunderstanding, question have to be rephrased, etc.
So the problem is not so mucht *that* they change stuff (which they have to), but *what* they change, and if you can trust them not to change the meaning.
No, I did not mean unethical, but maybe I am using the word in the wrong way, anyway. In my understanding, for something to be called ethical, it must serve some higher purpose, not just one person or company (i.e., something is not ethical only because it is not unethical... if you get my drift;-).
I agree with your points about advertising getting more complicated - but OTOH it might also be good for small companies, because the ad space in stadiums, etc. would get cheaper if fewer people would see these ads.
What I meant (and how I understood this sentence about competitors) was different: Often, you see news coverage where many people point microphones at some politician. These often have logos on them, and thus serve as ads for radio or tv stations. So tv station a could decide to block out all logos of other tv stations that appear in any footage they make themselves. Or even replace the logo. This is what I think would not be such a big deal - but it would be pretty annoying to those other stations. And I wouldn't call that ethical...
And on the second point: I was thinking more about weekly magazines (and tabloids) than magazines like National Geographic. And (at least here in Austria) they do change pictures. No important stuff ("this picture is proof that..."), but they do it anyway.
you can't trust pictures, anyway
on
Live or Memorex?
·
· Score: 3
First, I don't understand how blocking out a competitor's logo could be ethical. It might not be a big deal, but ethical?
Second, I think most of us know that pictures cannot be trusted, anyway. This has been true for a long time for photographs (especially on magazine covers), and is also true for most media reports (they can be edited without you being able to tell). And one thing that has been possible in TV since the beginning --- and which is much more effective --- is to reorder parts of an interview, for example, or to leave stuff out.
So I think this boils down to the old question of trust: Do I trust the media (or certain tv stations, papers, etc) to not manipulate the facts? It's now possible to do more stuff, but that doesn't mean we were safe from manipulation until yesterday.
(and I apologize for my troll posting yesterday - I was in a very, very bad mood.)
"from the 'its-funny-department'" - come on, is that all you can think of?
BTW, I must also scream "old news" here (which is an oxymoron, come to think of it), because this program has been around for the palm for quite some time (at least a year, maybe two).
But thats only if you look at no more than one generation. Because in the next generation, there will be in-breeding big time, and there will only be idiots.
Which, on the other hand, is what they started out with, anyway...
Anybody know where that bunker is? Lets throw some nukes at it just for fun. Theyre gonna believe its the end of the world, and well get rid of another six morons...
The question I replied to would not have arisen if the original poster had read the advisory before posting. So I don't understand what's wrong with telling him to do just that.
I don't think the effects of this lawsuit are quite as far-reaching as it looks. IIRC, EBay has expressly forbidden all search engines to index their pages (I think there even was a story on that here on/. some time ago).
So this company simply did something they knew they were not supposed to. Their fault. But that doesn't mean that if EBay wins, linking will become a crime (ignoring robots.txt maybe, as somebody else has pointed out - at least when you make money with ignoring it).
But it's probably not the programmers who write the press releases. So I would guess that the information about Blackdown was either ignored by the PR guys (who probably don't understand what this means, so they can't even be blamed), or was not made available to them in the first place (which might have been the fault of some manager in-between). It's bad for Sun (and especially the Blackdown guys - I would be pissed off as well if I was in their position), but it might just have been a misunderstanding or caused by a lack of knowledge. I sure hope they (Blackdown) continue their excellent work - without them, I would have to use Windows...
Hm, maybe there *is* a reason, why you have to register cars (and, in some countries, even weapons;-), after all. But it still seems a little odd to be forced to show an ID just to buy a printer. But who knows, it might happen sooner than we expect...
I also doubt that this is true. Even for money it would be quite difficult and probably not that difficult to defeat. But it would, of course, only work for one currency - so if you're into copying dollar bills, just order your copier (or printer) from abroad!
If I use my color printer to print counterfeit money, and the printer embeds some kind of serial number in the printout, how do they know it's *my* printer? I mean, I don't have to register the software or anything. And even if, I probably wouldn't give them the printer's serial number (or my real name, for that matter) if I was planning to use it to counterfeit money.
On a separate note, watermarking software has proven to be useless, since just loading and saving a jpg gets rid of it (and if that is not enough, just change the brightness slightly, or apply a "weak" filter). I don't know if any method exists yet, that really survives printing out and rescanning (I can't imagine that's possible. It's hard enough to get even close to the original colors with most current scanners and printers).
This isn't especially cheap, and if you consider what amount of information you get, you would be better off with a system you put together yourself. They don't even tell you what CPU it has... "64-bit RISC Processor" - what's that supposed to mean? They don't know or what? And what does "backup utility" mean? That tar is included? And as others have already pointed out, you can't configure it at all (other than saving $7 for ethernet cables - come on! is that a joke or what?) I'm sorry, but this is really lame. The only nice thing is the way it looks. But frankly, I don't give a damn about that. It might by nice for some non-tech users to set up a network for a small company, but I am not sure if they provide enough info for a newbie.
Did I get this right: Gambling is illegal where this guy lives? If so, they can sue back. Hey, the guy committed a crime, and should pay! (the funniest outcome would be that he got his $25k back, but had to pay $50k fines for gambling;-)
The statement said the Internet casinos pay the credit card companies and their affiliated banks a fee, usually between 2 and 5 percent for each online gambling transaction.
Isn't that the way it works with every credit card transaction, gambling or other? What's the point of that statement? Hey, I should sue them because I paid too much for something lately, and they are definitely responsible. After all, they have an interest in high prices, because they get a percentage in fees!
But it *is* kind of trendy... I mean, just look at the media. It's cool to talk about Linux and Open Source Software, and bash Microsoft (not just on/.;-) Linux is not *just* trendy, but it sure is trendy as well. And we could be thankful for that. After all, that helps spread it!
Okay, you obviously know a lot more than I do about neurobiology. But just a thought: I imagine it takes a lot more energy to grow new dendrites and synapses than just to modify existing ones. And how do they know in which direction to grow, anyway? The other explanation sounds simpler to me. But IANAN (I Am Not A Neurobiologist;-)...
Well don't expect a usable release any time soon. This looks *very, very* alpha. And I guess writing a complete VM is a hell of a lot of work (I'm just checking out the paper on "virtualization"). But it *is* cool, and choice is always good.
No, you don't need new synapses to learn - the old ones are good enough. Their "weights" change, though (i.e. how much a nerve pulse stimulates or inhibits the other neuron). You should have taken that neurobiology course yourself...;-)
Slashdot Mirror
The problem is, of course, that of finding a way between extracting the interesting stuff and changing what was said. Such an interview probably takes several hours, it takes some time for the interviewee to "warm up", there are misunderstanding, question have to be rephrased, etc.
So the problem is not so mucht *that* they change stuff (which they have to), but *what* they change, and if you can trust them not to change the meaning.
No, I did not mean unethical, but maybe I am using the word in the wrong way, anyway. In my understanding, for something to be called ethical, it must serve some higher purpose, not just one person or company (i.e., something is not ethical only because it is not unethical ... if you get my drift ;-).
...
..."), but they do it anyway.
I agree with your points about advertising getting more complicated - but OTOH it might also be good for small companies, because the ad space in stadiums, etc. would get cheaper if fewer people would see these ads.
What I meant (and how I understood this sentence about competitors) was different: Often, you see news coverage where many people point microphones at some politician. These often have logos on them, and thus serve as ads for radio or tv stations. So tv station a could decide to block out all logos of other tv stations that appear in any footage they make themselves. Or even replace the logo. This is what I think would not be such a big deal - but it would be pretty annoying to those other stations. And I wouldn't call that ethical
And on the second point: I was thinking more about weekly magazines (and tabloids) than magazines like National Geographic. And (at least here in Austria) they do change pictures. No important stuff ("this picture is proof that
First, I don't understand how blocking out a competitor's logo could be ethical. It might not be a big deal, but ethical?
Second, I think most of us know that pictures cannot be trusted, anyway. This has been true for a long time for photographs (especially on magazine covers), and is also true for most media reports (they can be edited without you being able to tell). And one thing that has been possible in TV since the beginning --- and which is much more effective --- is to reorder parts of an interview, for example, or to leave stuff out.
So I think this boils down to the old question of trust: Do I trust the media (or certain tv stations, papers, etc) to not manipulate the facts? It's now possible to do more stuff, but that doesn't mean we were safe from manipulation until yesterday.
(and I apologize for my troll posting yesterday - I was in a very, very bad mood.)
"from the 'its-funny-department'" - come on, is that all you can think of?
BTW, I must also scream "old news" here (which is an oxymoron, come to think of it), because this program has been around for the palm for quite some time (at least a year, maybe two).
You forgot "Who is going to clean our telephones?"
But thats only if you look at no more than one generation. Because in the next generation, there will be in-breeding big time, and there will only be idiots.
...
Which, on the other hand, is what they started out with, anyway
Ooops, sorry, I completely missed that ... ahem, well, maybe its not such a good idea after all ;-)
Anybody know where that bunker is? Lets throw some nukes at it just for fun. Theyre gonna believe its the end of the world, and well get rid of another six morons ...
That bloody kernel eats up 50MB already! No more ports! Stop it before it's too late! Heeeeelp!!
The question I replied to would not have arisen if the original poster had read the advisory before posting. So I don't understand what's wrong with telling him to do just that.
Why don't you read the advisory?
sorry ... that should read "explicitly forbidden" ... hey, what's wrong today?
I don't think the effects of this lawsuit are quite as far-reaching as it looks. IIRC, EBay has expressly forbidden all search engines to index their pages (I think there even was a story on that here on /. some time ago).
So this company simply did something they knew they were not supposed to. Their fault. But that doesn't mean that if EBay wins, linking will become a crime (ignoring robots.txt maybe, as somebody else has pointed out - at least when you make money with ignoring it).
But it's probably not the programmers who write the press releases. So I would guess that the information about Blackdown was either ignored by the PR guys (who probably don't understand what this means, so they can't even be blamed), or was not made available to them in the first place (which might have been the fault of some manager in-between). ...
It's bad for Sun (and especially the Blackdown guys - I would be pissed off as well if I was in their position), but it might just have been a misunderstanding or caused by a lack of knowledge.
I sure hope they (Blackdown) continue their excellent work - without them, I would have to use Windows
Hm, maybe there *is* a reason, why you have to register cars (and, in some countries, even weapons ;-), after all. But it still seems a little odd to be forced to show an ID just to buy a printer. But who knows, it might happen sooner than we expect ...
I also doubt that this is true. Even for money it would be quite difficult and probably not that difficult to defeat.
But it would, of course, only work for one currency - so if you're into copying dollar bills, just order your copier (or printer) from abroad!
If I use my color printer to print counterfeit money, and the printer embeds some kind of serial number in the printout, how do they know it's *my* printer? I mean, I don't have to register the software or anything. And even if, I probably wouldn't give them the printer's serial number (or my real name, for that matter) if I was planning to use it to counterfeit money.
On a separate note, watermarking software has proven to be useless, since just loading and saving a jpg gets rid of it (and if that is not enough, just change the brightness slightly, or apply a "weak" filter). I don't know if any method exists yet, that really survives printing out and rescanning (I can't imagine that's possible. It's hard enough to get even close to the original colors with most current scanners and printers).
This isn't especially cheap, and if you consider what amount of information you get, you would be better off with a system you put together yourself. They don't even tell you what CPU it has ... "64-bit RISC Processor" - what's that supposed to mean? They don't know or what? And what does "backup utility" mean? That tar is included?
And as others have already pointed out, you can't configure it at all (other than saving $7 for ethernet cables - come on! is that a joke or what?)
I'm sorry, but this is really lame. The only nice thing is the way it looks. But frankly, I don't give a damn about that. It might by nice for some non-tech users to set up a network for a small company, but I am not sure if they provide enough info for a newbie.
We have too much time, and too many lawyers in the USA.
...
... and too many tv shows looking for something new to talk about. But that's off-topic, of course
Did I get this right: Gambling is illegal where this guy lives? If so, they can sue back. Hey, the guy committed a crime, and should pay! (the funniest outcome would be that he got his $25k back, but had to pay $50k fines for gambling ;-)
Isn't that the way it works with every credit card transaction, gambling or other? What's the point of that statement? Hey, I should sue them because I paid too much for something lately, and they are definitely responsible. After all, they have an interest in high prices, because they get a percentage in fees!
But it *is* kind of trendy ... I mean, just look at the media. It's cool to talk about Linux and Open Source Software, and bash Microsoft (not just on /. ;-) Linux is not *just* trendy, but it sure is trendy as well.
And we could be thankful for that. After all, that helps spread it!
Okay, you obviously know a lot more than I do about neurobiology. But just a thought: I imagine it takes a lot more energy to grow new dendrites and synapses than just to modify existing ones. And how do they know in which direction to grow, anyway? The other explanation sounds simpler to me. But IANAN (I Am Not A Neurobiologist ;-) ...
Well don't expect a usable release any time soon. This looks *very, very* alpha. And I guess writing a complete VM is a hell of a lot of work (I'm just checking out the paper on "virtualization"). But it *is* cool, and choice is always good.
No, you don't need new synapses to learn - the old ones are good enough. Their "weights" change, though (i.e. how much a nerve pulse stimulates or inhibits the other neuron). You should have taken that neurobiology course yourself ... ;-)