No, I really do. It does great color and I like the scanner. I have an Epson V500 scanner also, and they both use the same software. I love the system. Now, the cost of cartridges I do confess is driving me batty. I am about ready to get one of the continuous refill systems, like this one for $70: http://www.inkproducts.com/ink-store/catalog/Epson-Continuous-Ink-System-CIS-For-Epson-R260-R280-R380-RX580-R-p-435.html. But when my Epson RX 595 dies, I'm going to get another one.
I think the classification schemes for the animal kingdom can provide insight for robotic development. The robotic community should pay attention to billions of years of evolution, and mine all the information possible:) There is a lot in common across all animal nervous systems (nerve conductors, synapses, brains, muscles, etc). Take the animal system for the eye for example - muscles, structures, nerves, synapses, and a brain to interpret. At the most fundamental levels, there is commonality in the types of cells used by animals. But there is incredible diversity in how they are implemented. One might compare the building blocks of the nervous systems to the robotic components, the way these components "work together" as the robotic OS, and the universe of ways they are implemented in animals as the "programs". Animals are categorized into Kingdom, Phylum, Class, Order, Family, Genus, and Species. In a very mature robotic development environment (many years from now), will we have similar classes of robots, with a set of category-specific OS subsystems and components? For example, the industrial robots mentioned above which are capable of accidentally moving a half-ton object as if it were a piece of paper will need a different OS subsystem than the Roomba, which is mostly harmless. Robots moving in water or air will belong to different categories, etc. Ultimately, if the animal system is a good model, robots will have some things in common, and much that is unique to their category.
In 2008, I did NOT get a 90-year-old retired friend's money back. He lost over half a million dollars to a Nigerian scammer! I felt somehow personally responsible, because about a year ago, he came over to my office to request that I fax some financial documents to a bank in Switzerland. I didn't even look at them, other than to notice that one was for $200,000 and the other $350,000. Four months later, he came over and wanted me to fax some documents to a "barrister" in London. I couldn't get the phone number to work, so I started checking on the address. I found it was a phony address, but nestled right in amongst "barrister row" in a suburb of London. I started checking on the barrister, "David Mark". Surprisingly, he didn't even change his name, and was linked to dozens of Nigerian scams. He DID use a "hotmail" address, which is a big red flag for a "barrister":). I discovered this "barrister" was promising my friend to get some of his money back, but that it would require "$40,000" fee. Evil, this was just the scammers continuing to prey on this poor man who had already lost almost all his money. He had actually already travelled (I found out) to Amsterdam to meet with these people. He had the $40,000 in a money belt to give them, but the airport authorities wouldn't let him out of the airport with the money and deported him back to America. LUCKY! He could see the scammers on the other side of the airport lines, holding up a card with his name on it! That is how close he was to losing his last $40,000. I finally was able to convince him (it wasn't easy) that these were scammers, and that his only recourse was to report it to the FBI, and that he most likely would never see his money again. This was very very hard for him. And he was a retired ENGINEER, no dummy, a very smart person. But old people are vulnerable to this sort of thing. Please tell all your old retired friends about these scammers. They are real, very very convincing world-class scam artists. When they get a bite, they turn it over to their very best con artists, and your friends will be in real danger of being fleeced.
This will bring on nudity amongst criminals. When this technology first is activated, a lot of robberies and muggings that "could" have been caught on camera will be missed because after many boring hours and days, the pilot(s) will start focusing on the occasional naked lady sunbathing (it IS southern California!). Even better will be a nudist colony, or the occasional nude tryst (this thing can see at night, right!). I can see the pilots "sharing" their best shots!
Then, when the sh*t hits the fan and the public becomes aware of all this peeping, for political reasons, the camera technology will have to be **expensively** upgraded to automatically blank out nude people.
Then, robbers will catch on, and start plying their trade in the Nude! Come on, you know I'm right!
I will never (*never*) buy anything from a company that sues its potential customers. I have donated money three times this last year to companies who produce free software. Any company benefitting from the RIAA tactics will never see a dime of my money.
My son played driving games on PC's for years growing up. He was skilled at weaving through lanes, where when I tried it, I was totally off the track in a few moments. A few years later he got his driving permit. We were heading across a long narrow bridge when suddenly a large RV appeared in the opposite lane, and we were going to meet on the narrowest part of the bridge. Before I could even think, my son threaded that tight spot perfectly, with inches on each side, and calm as a cucumber. Later, after I calmed down, I asked if the video games helped. He said, 'Yup, it was just like in the video games". So to me, they are driving simulators that maybe saved us from a wicked accident.
I work in a call center, and have worked with customers through tragic cases of data loss. It is no different in the home. There are two prime threats to data: hard drive failure, and theft or destruction of the "office" space. The first can be guarded against by making a local copy of the data in any way. The second requires an offsite backup. I have been investigating online backups (which protect against both threats), and have found two that are remarkable: http://www.carbonite.com/ - Unlimited backup for $5/mo, targetted for the home user http://www.datadepositbox.com/ - cheap backups for $1/MB/mo, targetted for businesses
Both of these can be fully automated for continuous online backup. Of course, broadband is ideal, but they do work over a dialup, it would just have to be on a lot (overnight?). And no, I have no relationship with these companies. I have tested datadepositbox, and it is amazing, but a little pricier. A friend is trying carbonite, and it looks very promising. I believe both Google and Microsoft are positioning themselves to provide free or very cheap online backup in the future. Keep an eye on this technology.
I've read all the comments, but haven't seen anyone point out directly that Microsoft is preparing legal strategies against Open Source. They are quietly patenting scores of programming methods, plus god-only-knows what else! What better way to learn what is "important" to the Open Source community than to "cooperate" with them in an analysis of Open Source code, and learn from the community members what they "really care about". That will let them focus their anti-open source legal machine with laser-like precision, instead of guessing. Call the "cooperation" what it is--under-cover legal research, with the cooperation of the opposing team. Brilliant!
My company has a new requirement to scan about 30,000 contracts per year (1-4 pages per contract). I've been looking at these digital senders, and have been pretty impressed. A recent develepment at HP, the HP Digital Sender 9100c has been imported into the HP4101 MFP, which is more capable and is cheaper to boot. Biggest difference, the 9100c does 15ppm at 300dpi, the HP4101 MFP does 25ppm at 600dpi. With an additional software package called DSS 3.0, the HP machine can scan your documents, convert them to TIFF or PDF, drop them into a folder on your server according to instructions from the control panel, which are configurable, and can email or fax them also. I am arranging a demo of the HP 4101 this week at my company, so do not have any experience, but have spoken with an IT director who uses them both (9100c and 4101), and he is very impressed with the HP4101, and it's cheaper. I think you can lease them for under $100, if you give a 4-year commitment. I don't know if that works for your department, but if it does, you could get a lot of bang for your buck. Of course, haven't had demo yet, and am paying attention to reports here of slow scan times, etc, and I will be sure to include that in my demo testing. Also the bit about getting a daemon running on the server. Thanks for the tips, all!
Actually, you can successfully track homeless people, but not by SSN. About 90% of homeless people try hard to give accurate information, and you can assign tracking numbers to them. The 10% who try to be deceptive can be dealt with by designing unduplication processes and constantly working with the information. Also, some percentage just will be wrong, but it is reasonably small. One of the great benefits of tracking is the aggregation of information, and some errors will not dimish the value to policy makers.
You are correct, about 10% either a) don't have one (eg, illegal alien), or b) report an incorrect SSN (eg, make one up, use someone elses, mix up digits, etc, etc). It is a significant effort to "unduplicate" people in such a database, and has to be an official part of the process. (Been there, done that:)
I designed, built and operated a homeless tracking system in Seattle, tracking over 50,000 homeless persons, so I have some direct experience. City, state and federal governments are budgeting and spending millions of dollars on the homeless. There is a legitimate concern that the money be effective. It takes accurate information to do that. Over 60% of the homeless have physical or mental handicaps, or are chemically dependent. Many others are homeless for a wide variety of reasons (many more than you can imagine). Many homeless persons move fluidly from area to area. Many are homeless for decades. It is a legitimate interest of government that their millions of dollars are spent wisely and well, and in the best interest of the homeless. There are many privacy issues involved, and these have been wrestled with by many homeless shelter administrators. Other issues are lack of verifiable ID's for many many homeless. Some of the data will be worthless. Nevertheless, as a policy aid, the aggregrate of the data is desperately needed by HUD and other agencies which fund homeless assistance programs. (As a philosophical note, cities have struggled with what to do with the homeless since cities were invented in the middle ages, and before. No ideal solution has ever been found, but banning, institutionalizing, killing, ignoring and assisting have all been tried over the ages).
Slashdot Mirror
No, I really do. It does great color and I like the scanner. I have an Epson V500 scanner also, and they both use the same software. I love the system. Now, the cost of cartridges I do confess is driving me batty. I am about ready to get one of the continuous refill systems, like this one for $70: http://www.inkproducts.com/ink-store/catalog/Epson-Continuous-Ink-System-CIS-For-Epson-R260-R280-R380-RX580-R-p-435.html. But when my Epson RX 595 dies, I'm going to get another one.
I think the classification schemes for the animal kingdom can provide insight for robotic development. The robotic community should pay attention to billions of years of evolution, and mine all the information possible :) There is a lot in common across all animal nervous systems (nerve conductors, synapses, brains, muscles, etc). Take the animal system for the eye for example - muscles, structures, nerves, synapses, and a brain to interpret. At the most fundamental levels, there is commonality in the types of cells used by animals. But there is incredible diversity in how they are implemented. One might compare the building blocks of the nervous systems to the robotic components, the way these components "work together" as the robotic OS, and the universe of ways they are implemented in animals as the "programs". Animals are categorized into Kingdom, Phylum, Class, Order, Family, Genus, and Species. In a very mature robotic development environment (many years from now), will we have similar classes of robots, with a set of category-specific OS subsystems and components? For example, the industrial robots mentioned above which are capable of accidentally moving a half-ton object as if it were a piece of paper will need a different OS subsystem than the Roomba, which is mostly harmless. Robots moving in water or air will belong to different categories, etc. Ultimately, if the animal system is a good model, robots will have some things in common, and much that is unique to their category.
In 2008, I did NOT get a 90-year-old retired friend's money back. He lost over half a million dollars to a Nigerian scammer! I felt somehow personally responsible, because about a year ago, he came over to my office to request that I fax some financial documents to a bank in Switzerland. I didn't even look at them, other than to notice that one was for $200,000 and the other $350,000. Four months later, he came over and wanted me to fax some documents to a "barrister" in London. I couldn't get the phone number to work, so I started checking on the address. I found it was a phony address, but nestled right in amongst "barrister row" in a suburb of London. I started checking on the barrister, "David Mark". Surprisingly, he didn't even change his name, and was linked to dozens of Nigerian scams. He DID use a "hotmail" address, which is a big red flag for a "barrister" :). I discovered this "barrister" was promising my friend to get some of his money back, but that it would require "$40,000" fee. Evil, this was just the scammers continuing to prey on this poor man who had already lost almost all his money. He had actually already travelled (I found out) to Amsterdam to meet with these people. He had the $40,000 in a money belt to give them, but the airport authorities wouldn't let him out of the airport with the money and deported him back to America. LUCKY! He could see the scammers on the other side of the airport lines, holding up a card with his name on it! That is how close he was to losing his last $40,000. I finally was able to convince him (it wasn't easy) that these were scammers, and that his only recourse was to report it to the FBI, and that he most likely would never see his money again. This was very very hard for him. And he was a retired ENGINEER, no dummy, a very smart person. But old people are vulnerable to this sort of thing. Please tell all your old retired friends about these scammers. They are real, very very convincing world-class scam artists. When they get a bite, they turn it over to their very best con artists, and your friends will be in real danger of being fleeced.
This will bring on nudity amongst criminals. When this technology first is activated, a lot of robberies and muggings that "could" have been caught on camera will be missed because after many boring hours and days, the pilot(s) will start focusing on the occasional naked lady sunbathing (it IS southern California!). Even better will be a nudist colony, or the occasional nude tryst (this thing can see at night, right!). I can see the pilots "sharing" their best shots!
Then, when the sh*t hits the fan and the public becomes aware of all this peeping, for political reasons, the camera technology will have to be **expensively** upgraded to automatically blank out nude people.
Then, robbers will catch on, and start plying their trade in the Nude! Come on, you know I'm right!
I will never (*never*) buy anything from a company that sues its potential customers. I have donated money three times this last year to companies who produce free software. Any company benefitting from the RIAA tactics will never see a dime of my money.
My son played driving games on PC's for years growing up. He was skilled at weaving through lanes, where when I tried it, I was totally off the track in a few moments. A few years later he got his driving permit. We were heading across a long narrow bridge when suddenly a large RV appeared in the opposite lane, and we were going to meet on the narrowest part of the bridge. Before I could even think, my son threaded that tight spot perfectly, with inches on each side, and calm as a cucumber. Later, after I calmed down, I asked if the video games helped. He said, 'Yup, it was just like in the video games". So to me, they are driving simulators that maybe saved us from a wicked accident.
I work in a call center, and have worked with customers through tragic cases of data loss. It is no different in the home. There are two prime threats to data: hard drive failure, and theft or destruction of the "office" space. The first can be guarded against by making a local copy of the data in any way. The second requires an offsite backup. I have been investigating online backups (which protect against both threats), and have found two that are remarkable:
http://www.carbonite.com/ - Unlimited backup for $5/mo, targetted for the home user
http://www.datadepositbox.com/ - cheap backups for $1/MB/mo, targetted for businesses
Both of these can be fully automated for continuous online backup. Of course, broadband is ideal, but they do work over a dialup, it would just have to be on a lot (overnight?). And no, I have no relationship with these companies. I have tested datadepositbox, and it is amazing, but a little pricier. A friend is trying carbonite, and it looks very promising. I believe both Google and Microsoft are positioning themselves to provide free or very cheap online backup in the future. Keep an eye on this technology.
I've read all the comments, but haven't seen anyone point out directly that Microsoft is preparing legal strategies against Open Source. They are quietly patenting scores of programming methods, plus god-only-knows what else! What better way to learn what is "important" to the Open Source community than to "cooperate" with them in an analysis of Open Source code, and learn from the community members what they "really care about". That will let them focus their anti-open source legal machine with laser-like precision, instead of guessing. Call the "cooperation" what it is--under-cover legal research, with the cooperation of the opposing team. Brilliant!
My company has a new requirement to scan about 30,000 contracts per year (1-4 pages per contract). I've been looking at these digital senders, and have been pretty impressed. A recent develepment at HP, the HP Digital Sender 9100c has been imported into the HP4101 MFP, which is more capable and is cheaper to boot. Biggest difference, the 9100c does 15ppm at 300dpi, the HP4101 MFP does 25ppm at 600dpi. With an additional software package called DSS 3.0, the HP machine can scan your documents, convert them to TIFF or PDF, drop them into a folder on your server according to instructions from the control panel, which are configurable, and can email or fax them also. I am arranging a demo of the HP 4101 this week at my company, so do not have any experience, but have spoken with an IT director who uses them both (9100c and 4101), and he is very impressed with the HP4101, and it's cheaper. I think you can lease them for under $100, if you give a 4-year commitment. I don't know if that works for your department, but if it does, you could get a lot of bang for your buck. Of course, haven't had demo yet, and am paying attention to reports here of slow scan times, etc, and I will be sure to include that in my demo testing. Also the bit about getting a daemon running on the server. Thanks for the tips, all!
Actually, you can successfully track homeless people, but not by SSN. About 90% of homeless people try hard to give accurate information, and you can assign tracking numbers to them. The 10% who try to be deceptive can be dealt with by designing unduplication processes and constantly working with the information. Also, some percentage just will be wrong, but it is reasonably small. One of the great benefits of tracking is the aggregation of information, and some errors will not dimish the value to policy makers.
You are correct, about 10% either a) don't have one (eg, illegal alien), or b) report an incorrect SSN (eg, make one up, use someone elses, mix up digits, etc, etc). It is a significant effort to "unduplicate" people in such a database, and has to be an official part of the process. (Been there, done that :)
I designed, built and operated a homeless tracking system in Seattle, tracking over 50,000 homeless persons, so I have some direct experience. City, state and federal governments are budgeting and spending millions of dollars on the homeless. There is a legitimate concern that the money be effective. It takes accurate information to do that. Over 60% of the homeless have physical or mental handicaps, or are chemically dependent. Many others are homeless for a wide variety of reasons (many more than you can imagine). Many homeless persons move fluidly from area to area. Many are homeless for decades. It is a legitimate interest of government that their millions of dollars are spent wisely and well, and in the best interest of the homeless. There are many privacy issues involved, and these have been wrestled with by many homeless shelter administrators. Other issues are lack of verifiable ID's for many many homeless. Some of the data will be worthless. Nevertheless, as a policy aid, the aggregrate of the data is desperately needed by HUD and other agencies which fund homeless assistance programs. (As a philosophical note, cities have struggled with what to do with the homeless since cities were invented in the middle ages, and before. No ideal solution has ever been found, but banning, institutionalizing, killing, ignoring and assisting have all been tried over the ages).