You forgot to take into account how *long* you plan to wait. There's a big difference between "We think Apple will release a new XXXX sooner or later" and "Apple is very likely release a new XXXX at Macworld next week." I hope nobody is basing their purchasing decisions off TFA, since it's so vague and WWDC is way off in June, but it's standard procedure when buying anything to make sure you don't miss a chance to get more for less.
Frontline grunts aren't supposed to have original thoughts- they're supposed to follow orders and perform their assigned functions. Original thought is for officers and politicians.
Even if you somehow manage to obtain OS X without the dev tools, you can download them for free from Apple's site (after signing up for a free online ADC account).
Not really... Physics processing boils down to *2* things, which are themselves huge and complex fields:
Collision detection. You have some representations in the world- are any two of them intersecting? The answer to this depends on how they are represented and can be fast (boxes, cylinders, spheres) or expensive (polygon soup) or anything in between. The triangle algorithm you describe is indeed simple, but it's usually not feasible to run it on every triangle pair in the world in every frame- which is where the scene graph and various methods for trivial rejection come in.
Collision response. Once you have found an intersection, how do you correct the world state so that the objects are a) no longer colliding b) exhibit the correct behavior in response to the collision over the following state updates? A large part of this is quantifying the exact nature and magnitude of the overlap between objects, and for anything that isn't a primitive shape this can be complex.
The complexity of physics in games is constantly increasing, which is why more and more companies are turning to providers like Havok who work on these problems full-time (instead of trying to solve them and make the rest of the game simultaneously, as an in-house solution would require).
Freedom of speech means freedom from consequences imposed by the government. You should still watch your mouth around family, friends, your boss, etc, because you don't have any protection from anything they might do in response (except for some specific exceptions in the last case, and things that are illegal anyway).
This defense doesn't make any sense. There is always a copying process involved in a download, because the song data is being copied in RAM by the HTTP server in order to transmit it to you. The process of deriving the copy from the original media takes place on AllOfMp3's servers, so they could still be held responsible for it if it was illegal.
It just sounds like the article summary is incorrect- the loophole has more to do with the fact that the Russian law in question specifically enumerates the types of media it applies to, and "mp3" is not on the list.
I prefer to think that it's no longer necessary to fight for country, home, and family- those things have been well-secured in the long term. No one complains that we don't need to fight off smallpox or predatory animals any more.
(Of course, avoiding decadence is still important, but it's a separate problem.)
An even bigger problem is series that reach their natural end and then don't stop- the studio execs realize they have a cash cow on their hands and insist that the franchise continue to run even as the story makes less and less sense and the hardcore fans give up and drift off (see: X-files). Try imagining Lord of the Rings with a fourth and fifth book, in which something even MORE evil attacks Middle Earth, and everyone has to band together to fight it off again. Maybe this time the Hobbits have become lazy and corrupt and humans will ally with orcs!
Sturgeon's Law says not to make generalized statements like that. There's good sci-fi on TV, and there are good sci-fi books. There are also vastly more examples of bad sci-fi in both mediums.
What's replacing it is more subdued sci-fi elements. It was once acceptable to base an entire show around "HEY LOOK SPACESHIPS"; that's no longer true. The standard trappings of sci-fi are no longer sufficient to drive a show, they must become the foundation upon which traditionally dramatic situations are constructed. In a typical TOS or even TNG episode, the plot usually revolves around a brand-new alien race with some unique but secret quirk that the heroes must discover to solve the crisis. And now look at BSG- there are some episodes where you never see a spaceship outside of momentary establishing shots after the commercial breaks and in the background of the hangar bay set. It may as well be a military drama set on Earth, which is a large part of its appeal.
I haven't read the paper, but what if they established a pattern over a large packet capture? The sequence of slots in the 240,000 possible time deviation values could be a unique property in and of itself.
Like all the other posts have said, enforcing password changing just makes people violate the security in other places because the act of changing a password and re-memorizing it is just a pain in the ass. It doesn't help the window of exploitation if the password becomes much easier to find because it's sitting in plain sight on the employee's desk.
ATI's cards have been able to do this for a while- there's an option in the driver control panel to make the image (and corresponding resolutions) sideways or upside-down. Mounting the monitor so that it can be used in that mode remains an exercise for the reader.
It's not just about the numbers, it's just about the money. If they can make more from download fees than they lost from having to lower advertising rates, then they won't care about the raw viewership numbers. The problem is convincing them to take this risk in the first place.
Just one spammer sends "some" spam. A lot of spammers send a lot of it. How much of your inbox would have to consist of spam before you consider spam a problem? 25%? 50%? 99.9%?
Also, I assume from these posts that you don't use any kind of junk mail filter (wouldn't want to violate those spammers' rights now would we?). So how much do you get?
We already tried doing this the "right" way, with opt-out forms. Spammers used them for address harvesting and nobody trusts them any more (assuming they were ever obeyed in the first place). If a rule can't be enforced, it may as well not exist, and a technical or legal solution is needed.
This is a pretty silly standpoint any way you slice it. Web sites are set up to "welcome communication" too; does that mean I have a right to DoS them (hey, it's just pinging) unless explicitly told not to?
What rights exactly are being violated here? Sure, we want music to be cheaper, and raising its price may be a dumb idea, but that's entirely the sellers' decision. If they want to commit market suicide, they have every right to do that, regardless of how dumb a move it might be and how much we wouldn't like it.
Slashdot Mirror
You forgot to take into account how *long* you plan to wait. There's a big difference between "We think Apple will release a new XXXX sooner or later" and "Apple is very likely release a new XXXX at Macworld next week." I hope nobody is basing their purchasing decisions off TFA, since it's so vague and WWDC is way off in June, but it's standard procedure when buying anything to make sure you don't miss a chance to get more for less.
Most Americans need to drive a car in order to stay alive (do their job or obtain food/necessities). Playing MMORPGs is purely a luxury.
The article doesn't break it down, but I'd guess that part of it goes to the Deep Space Network.
Frontline grunts aren't supposed to have original thoughts- they're supposed to follow orders and perform their assigned functions. Original thought is for officers and politicians.
They did.
Even if you somehow manage to obtain OS X without the dev tools, you can download them for free from Apple's site (after signing up for a free online ADC account).
Anyone who's not a total free software zealot doesn't like arguing that one- because they don't care.
- Collision detection. You have some representations in the world- are any two of them intersecting? The answer to this depends on how they are represented and can be fast (boxes, cylinders, spheres) or expensive (polygon soup) or anything in between. The triangle algorithm you describe is indeed simple, but it's usually not feasible to run it on every triangle pair in the world in every frame- which is where the scene graph and various methods for trivial rejection come in.
- Collision response. Once you have found an intersection, how do you correct the world state so that the objects are a) no longer colliding b) exhibit the correct behavior in response to the collision over the following state updates? A large part of this is quantifying the exact nature and magnitude of the overlap between objects, and for anything that isn't a primitive shape this can be complex.
The complexity of physics in games is constantly increasing, which is why more and more companies are turning to providers like Havok who work on these problems full-time (instead of trying to solve them and make the rest of the game simultaneously, as an in-house solution would require).8) ???
9) Profit!
This was also invented by Frank Herbert- Dune featured something called shigawire, which sounds very similar to what's described in TFA.
Freedom of speech means freedom from consequences imposed by the government. You should still watch your mouth around family, friends, your boss, etc, because you don't have any protection from anything they might do in response (except for some specific exceptions in the last case, and things that are illegal anyway).
This defense doesn't make any sense. There is always a copying process involved in a download, because the song data is being copied in RAM by the HTTP server in order to transmit it to you. The process of deriving the copy from the original media takes place on AllOfMp3's servers, so they could still be held responsible for it if it was illegal.
It just sounds like the article summary is incorrect- the loophole has more to do with the fact that the Russian law in question specifically enumerates the types of media it applies to, and "mp3" is not on the list.
I think we just found the ideal antonym for "beleagured".
I prefer to think that it's no longer necessary to fight for country, home, and family- those things have been well-secured in the long term. No one complains that we don't need to fight off smallpox or predatory animals any more.
(Of course, avoiding decadence is still important, but it's a separate problem.)
An even bigger problem is series that reach their natural end and then don't stop- the studio execs realize they have a cash cow on their hands and insist that the franchise continue to run even as the story makes less and less sense and the hardcore fans give up and drift off (see: X-files). Try imagining Lord of the Rings with a fourth and fifth book, in which something even MORE evil attacks Middle Earth, and everyone has to band together to fight it off again. Maybe this time the Hobbits have become lazy and corrupt and humans will ally with orcs!
Sturgeon's Law says not to make generalized statements like that. There's good sci-fi on TV, and there are good sci-fi books. There are also vastly more examples of bad sci-fi in both mediums.
What's replacing it is more subdued sci-fi elements. It was once acceptable to base an entire show around "HEY LOOK SPACESHIPS"; that's no longer true. The standard trappings of sci-fi are no longer sufficient to drive a show, they must become the foundation upon which traditionally dramatic situations are constructed. In a typical TOS or even TNG episode, the plot usually revolves around a brand-new alien race with some unique but secret quirk that the heroes must discover to solve the crisis. And now look at BSG- there are some episodes where you never see a spaceship outside of momentary establishing shots after the commercial breaks and in the background of the hangar bay set. It may as well be a military drama set on Earth, which is a large part of its appeal.
That's at least partly because no one has ever tried to defend the "right to leak" before; they just gave up the info and it blew over quickly.
I haven't read the paper, but what if they established a pattern over a large packet capture? The sequence of slots in the 240,000 possible time deviation values could be a unique property in and of itself.
Like all the other posts have said, enforcing password changing just makes people violate the security in other places because the act of changing a password and re-memorizing it is just a pain in the ass. It doesn't help the window of exploitation if the password becomes much easier to find because it's sitting in plain sight on the employee's desk.
ATI's cards have been able to do this for a while- there's an option in the driver control panel to make the image (and corresponding resolutions) sideways or upside-down. Mounting the monitor so that it can be used in that mode remains an exercise for the reader.
It's not just about the numbers, it's just about the money. If they can make more from download fees than they lost from having to lower advertising rates, then they won't care about the raw viewership numbers. The problem is convincing them to take this risk in the first place.
Just one spammer sends "some" spam. A lot of spammers send a lot of it. How much of your inbox would have to consist of spam before you consider spam a problem? 25%? 50%? 99.9%?
Also, I assume from these posts that you don't use any kind of junk mail filter (wouldn't want to violate those spammers' rights now would we?). So how much do you get?
We already tried doing this the "right" way, with opt-out forms. Spammers used them for address harvesting and nobody trusts them any more (assuming they were ever obeyed in the first place). If a rule can't be enforced, it may as well not exist, and a technical or legal solution is needed.
This is a pretty silly standpoint any way you slice it. Web sites are set up to "welcome communication" too; does that mean I have a right to DoS them (hey, it's just pinging) unless explicitly told not to?
What rights exactly are being violated here? Sure, we want music to be cheaper, and raising its price may be a dumb idea, but that's entirely the sellers' decision. If they want to commit market suicide, they have every right to do that, regardless of how dumb a move it might be and how much we wouldn't like it.