There's also the argument that gets brought forward that the bystander usually doesn't record the entire encounter. Sometimes what happened (or was visible) a second before means what the policeman is doing is justified to keep the peace. And a phone video clip often leads to a 'trail by media' where the police don't get to present their side of the story.
I'm not a fan of the argument, but it's at least somewhat sane. Like the above, it's only valid a subset of the time, and there are other ways to handle that subset.
Some have. But it's not a national law: It's state-by-state. Some states have even passed legislation explicitly allowing recording of the police. (I think in other cases the state courts have smacked down the police, and no one's pressed it further.)
Massachusetts hasn't. So it's being an issue there, and because of the way the case was brought up it can be attacked on Constitutional grounds.
In addition to Baen, there are a fair number of stores online that sell ebooks without any DRM. (For at least some of their catalog.) My favorite is Fictionwise. (Look for 'Multiformat Ebooks'.)
I think Stallman would have been better to highlight and point out those stores, and encourage people to use them.
Also: LCD screens are produced mainly in sizes and resolutions that are valuable for TV's and desktop monitors, and laptop makers typically just buy off-the-shelf sizes. And for TVs and desktop monitors, the glossy doesn't have the same downside. (Users just position it so that any glare isn't a problem.)
If you fly economy+ or better there will be power ports on just about all airlines these days. (It's a DC jack, not found anywhere on the ground, so you'll need a special adaptor.)
Give it at least ten years before it hits economy.
It would not surprise me if the average number of cellular devices per person on a plane is over 1. First off, everyone probably has their cell phone. Including at least half the kids. Then start adding in iPads, Kindles, Nooks, etc. that all have cellular connections for data. (Depending on model.) A few people in business and first class probably have cellular modems on their laptops, often as well as the above.
I guessing the average traveler carries more cellular devices than you'd think.;)
DTN is fine and dandy, but it doesn't address the issue of what medium you are using to transmit the network. Any implementation of RFC1149 should include an implementation of RFC4838 as a matter of course, because the RTT is high. But since the operating-training for RFC1149 is so specialized, (as shown here: avian carriers would be ideal in this situation, but are being avoided because of the training and setup costs) it makes sense to expand the techniques to related mediums. Hopefully then a suitable transport medium will be available in all (or at least most) circumstances.
Remember: RFCs work together, not each on their own. They each describe a single part of the network, or even just a part of that part's behavior.
Hmm. That's about 25% of the world's GDP spent on internet access.
(Assuming, of course, that all that data actually transferred over the internet. Which is actually not all that likely: Much of that data would be data generated in-house, and transfered - if not not processed on the same server which generates it - over local networks. After all, if you generated a few TB of data every day that needed to be processed, why spend money to send it someplace if you don't have to?)
No, they are a horrible idea. They encourage people to spend money on 3D movies while avoiding the 3D.
Basically, every movie you watch while using those glasses is telling Hollywood that you are willing to pay for the 3D effect. When in actuality, you are willing to pay for the 3D effect to be removed.
A better idea is would be to ask the ticket clerk 'do you have a showing in 2D? No? Oh, well, we'll go somewhere else then. Bye.' Enough of those and it'll get reported to the manager. Enough of those and it'll get reported to the theater owner. Enough of those and it will get reported to the distributer. Enough of those and it'll get reported to the film studio. (Of course, the theater owner has long since been supplying the local demand for a 2D movie at that point.)
Then the'll stop making them, and you won't need those glasses.
A $15 laser solution that doesn't improve efficiency but that lasts 100,000 miles is worth the money. If you had one that doubles efficiency but doesn't do last any longer, it can probably cost more and be worth it.
So far they've got a technology preview that they think meets all the needs of an automotive application. They'll need to design and test an engine that can use it before they'll know the rest, but it's impressive tech so far. It's made from fairly cheap materials, can handle the heat and stress, and can preform a reliable ignition. Is that enough? Maybe, but it looks like enough to be worth trying in a more complete test. Which is all they are trying to do at the moment.
Which would be why they want to talk to auto manufacturers about designing engines that can take advantage of the specific capabilities of this new tech.
There's nothing in the article that makes me think they think they can produce a drop-in replacement for current vehicles.
Catalytic converters are expensive and relatively heavy. Take them out and you get a cheaper, lighter car. Cheaper is always good, and lighter translates to better handling and better fuel economy. Probably nothing major, but every little bit helps.
According to the article, one of the main reasons spark plugs get gummed up is the electrical sparks they are putting out. Electric arcs tend to corrode their endpoints. With a laser, this isn't a problem. Also, the lasers aren't going to try to ignite combustion right in front of them: It's more efficient to ignite it away from them, in the center of the cylinder. Spark plugs can't do that at all.
Plus, of course, any laser capable of igniting a fuel-air mixture reliably in a few nanoseconds can burn through a bit of soot on the way.
In one of Asimov's books he describes doing research/reading in the Imperial Library of Trantor; I think that's what this guy is trying to describe. Links become basically infinite depth background trees on any word or phrase or sentence or paragraph or whatever level you want.
Which would be amazing, in an academic context. But I'm not sure it would be more useful in a wider context than what we have now.
That's been tried. The corporations started cheap schools that only educated people just enough to work in the corporation's factories. (At a wage where the people couldn't afford to send their children to a better school.)
Countries that had public education then out-innovated the non-public education countries, and were better competitors in the global marketplace.
We don't need to go quite that sadistic, and we can still make it realistic.
Here's my version: It starts with one mole. It comes up or goes down, on a random schedule. If you hit it, you now have two moles, and they tend to stay up more. Hit one of them, same thing happens again.
Prizes go out if there are no moles up at the end of the set timeframe.
Correlation is not causation. It's likely that Firefox, Crome, Opera, etc, would all be exactly where they are today without the settlement. The settlement doesn't appear to have helped or hurt anyone's participation in the market.
(And I'm not sure any barriers were removed, actually. You still can barely buy a machine without Windows, and it will have IE and I think only IE on it. That was the complaint.)
Slashdot Mirror
There's also the argument that gets brought forward that the bystander usually doesn't record the entire encounter. Sometimes what happened (or was visible) a second before means what the policeman is doing is justified to keep the peace. And a phone video clip often leads to a 'trail by media' where the police don't get to present their side of the story.
I'm not a fan of the argument, but it's at least somewhat sane. Like the above, it's only valid a subset of the time, and there are other ways to handle that subset.
You are doing something the policeman on the scene doesn't like. They will try to find a way to make it illegal.
Some have. But it's not a national law: It's state-by-state. Some states have even passed legislation explicitly allowing recording of the police. (I think in other cases the state courts have smacked down the police, and no one's pressed it further.)
Massachusetts hasn't. So it's being an issue there, and because of the way the case was brought up it can be attacked on Constitutional grounds.
IIRC, it's hardwired to come on.
Of course, it's a little light, and it only needs to come on for a moment to take a picture.
In addition to Baen, there are a fair number of stores online that sell ebooks without any DRM. (For at least some of their catalog.) My favorite is Fictionwise. (Look for 'Multiformat Ebooks'.)
I think Stallman would have been better to highlight and point out those stores, and encourage people to use them.
Your head exploding is a perfectly normal reaction to trying to comprehend modern physics. Carry on.
Also: LCD screens are produced mainly in sizes and resolutions that are valuable for TV's and desktop monitors, and laptop makers typically just buy off-the-shelf sizes. And for TVs and desktop monitors, the glossy doesn't have the same downside. (Users just position it so that any glare isn't a problem.)
If you fly economy+ or better there will be power ports on just about all airlines these days. (It's a DC jack, not found anywhere on the ground, so you'll need a special adaptor.)
Give it at least ten years before it hits economy.
It would not surprise me if the average number of cellular devices per person on a plane is over 1. First off, everyone probably has their cell phone. Including at least half the kids. Then start adding in iPads, Kindles, Nooks, etc. that all have cellular connections for data. (Depending on model.) A few people in business and first class probably have cellular modems on their laptops, often as well as the above.
I guessing the average traveler carries more cellular devices than you'd think. ;)
DTN is fine and dandy, but it doesn't address the issue of what medium you are using to transmit the network. Any implementation of RFC1149 should include an implementation of RFC4838 as a matter of course, because the RTT is high. But since the operating-training for RFC1149 is so specialized, (as shown here: avian carriers would be ideal in this situation, but are being avoided because of the training and setup costs) it makes sense to expand the techniques to related mediums. Hopefully then a suitable transport medium will be available in all (or at least most) circumstances.
Remember: RFCs work together, not each on their own. They each describe a single part of the network, or even just a part of that part's behavior.
Hmm. That's about 25% of the world's GDP spent on internet access.
(Assuming, of course, that all that data actually transferred over the internet. Which is actually not all that likely: Much of that data would be data generated in-house, and transfered - if not not processed on the same server which generates it - over local networks. After all, if you generated a few TB of data every day that needed to be processed, why spend money to send it someplace if you don't have to?)
'Enter' should do it, in most cases...
(Assuming, of course, that the (in)correct command has been typed at the command line already.)
No, they are a horrible idea. They encourage people to spend money on 3D movies while avoiding the 3D.
Basically, every movie you watch while using those glasses is telling Hollywood that you are willing to pay for the 3D effect. When in actuality, you are willing to pay for the 3D effect to be removed.
A better idea is would be to ask the ticket clerk 'do you have a showing in 2D? No? Oh, well, we'll go somewhere else then. Bye.' Enough of those and it'll get reported to the manager. Enough of those and it'll get reported to the theater owner. Enough of those and it will get reported to the distributer. Enough of those and it'll get reported to the film studio. (Of course, the theater owner has long since been supplying the local demand for a 2D movie at that point.)
Then the'll stop making them, and you won't need those glasses.
I was basing my numbers on the previous commenter, as I tend to take my car to a mechanic I trust, and then say 'go do whatever it needs'. ;)
Depends on:
A: How much they can improve the fuel efficiency.
B: How long they last.
C: How much they cost.
A $15 laser solution that doesn't improve efficiency but that lasts 100,000 miles is worth the money. If you had one that doubles efficiency but doesn't do last any longer, it can probably cost more and be worth it.
So far they've got a technology preview that they think meets all the needs of an automotive application. They'll need to design and test an engine that can use it before they'll know the rest, but it's impressive tech so far. It's made from fairly cheap materials, can handle the heat and stress, and can preform a reliable ignition. Is that enough? Maybe, but it looks like enough to be worth trying in a more complete test. Which is all they are trying to do at the moment.
Which would be why they want to talk to auto manufacturers about designing engines that can take advantage of the specific capabilities of this new tech.
There's nothing in the article that makes me think they think they can produce a drop-in replacement for current vehicles.
Catalytic converters are expensive and relatively heavy. Take them out and you get a cheaper, lighter car. Cheaper is always good, and lighter translates to better handling and better fuel economy. Probably nothing major, but every little bit helps.
If by 'fuel mixture' you mean 'ratio of air to fuel', yeah, you'd need a new mix to get the most benefits.
If by 'fuel mixture' you mean switching out gasoline for something else, probably not.
According to the article, one of the main reasons spark plugs get gummed up is the electrical sparks they are putting out. Electric arcs tend to corrode their endpoints. With a laser, this isn't a problem. Also, the lasers aren't going to try to ignite combustion right in front of them: It's more efficient to ignite it away from them, in the center of the cylinder. Spark plugs can't do that at all.
Plus, of course, any laser capable of igniting a fuel-air mixture reliably in a few nanoseconds can burn through a bit of soot on the way.
In one of Asimov's books he describes doing research/reading in the Imperial Library of Trantor; I think that's what this guy is trying to describe. Links become basically infinite depth background trees on any word or phrase or sentence or paragraph or whatever level you want.
Which would be amazing, in an academic context. But I'm not sure it would be more useful in a wider context than what we have now.
That's been tried. The corporations started cheap schools that only educated people just enough to work in the corporation's factories. (At a wage where the people couldn't afford to send their children to a better school.)
Countries that had public education then out-innovated the non-public education countries, and were better competitors in the global marketplace.
You forgot the Player Pianos, which overlapped with Gramaphones.
We don't need to go quite that sadistic, and we can still make it realistic.
Here's my version: It starts with one mole. It comes up or goes down, on a random schedule. If you hit it, you now have two moles, and they tend to stay up more. Hit one of them, same thing happens again.
Prizes go out if there are no moles up at the end of the set timeframe.
Correlation is not causation. It's likely that Firefox, Crome, Opera, etc, would all be exactly where they are today without the settlement. The settlement doesn't appear to have helped or hurt anyone's participation in the market.
(And I'm not sure any barriers were removed, actually. You still can barely buy a machine without Windows, and it will have IE and I think only IE on it. That was the complaint.)
If they thought they could get 1% upfront as a security fee, I'm sure there are lots of collection agencies who would love that job.