You *did* buy a digital object. That was the original difference between Apple's store and the other DRM implementations: You have complete freedom to do anything you want with the file with the Finder. You just need authorization to use (play, burn) it in iTunes. You are free to, and Apple recommends that you, copy the file for backup purposes.
They already know you read the fucking article, your browser sends their server your IP and useragent. Exactly what do you think is going to happen to you once the NYT has your name? Ninjas assassins jumping through the window? Men is black suits with video cameras following you around? Children kidnapped for reading such a subversive site? Or even, horror or horrors, THE VERY SLIGHT CHANCE OF GETTING ADVERTISEMENTS WHICH YOU CAN IGNORE ANYWAY. OH THE HUMANITY
I think he just skipped a few steps... Let me try it.
Even if an address appears more than once, it's not the same as the other addresses. So, each of the addresses that appears more than once counts as unique the first time it appears. So the correct equation is 1795633 + 0.5*4107246 + 0.33*287685 +.25*27191 + (some small numbers) = 3.8 million distinct addresses, or 35% unique. An even worse deal for the buyer than we thought:P
That's what I apparently failed to say: Why aren't spaceships equipped with "helicopter blades"? I mean, what if they used rockets to violate the normal behavior of LEO motion? They could place themselves in a trajectory that does not hit the atmosphere while moving too slowly to be truly orbiting, maintaining this course with constant upward thrust.
Not directly related to the Indian project, but something I've always wondered...
Why is re-entry always performed by using the atmosphere for braking? What is the main obstacle to building a craft that uses its engines to reduce its speed to well below orbital velocity while "hovering" outside the atmosphere in a non-sustainable orbital path until it's slow enough to reduce stress from air resistance and heat? Maybe the cost incurred by carrying the controlled descent system around would be offset by savings in maintenance, the exotic materials required to build the vehicle, etc.
Every time you consume energy, you convert it from a useful form to a useless (heat) form which cannot be recovered, and you prevent its consumption by something else. Considering that aside from sunlight (which humans cannot use in its raw form) this planet is a closed system, any activity including "natural" subsistence farming or hunting/gathering will indirectly cause something to die. This is how life on Earth works, and it will never change (barring massive technological change or new sources of previously untapped energy).
Someone should really make a movie about a guy with this problem. Maybe he could forget why his wife died or something. I think Guy Pearce is available.
I suspect that both of these technologies (reading individual memories and erasing individual memories) are closely related and will arrive simultaneously, so this problem will not occur.
Because in the real world, it doesn't cost any money to have a building just standing there (assuming it doesn't begin to degrade through lack of maintenance). Everything in the virtual world consumes server resources, and they're trying to more closely match that consumption with their subscription structure.
CPU time is also finite. If 1 process can send 8,000 emails at 100% CPU usage, then 10 processes will send 800 emails each and 8,000 emails in the same time. You're right that a machine with multiple CPUs could send more email, but a 4-CPU box could still send only 32,000 emails per day instead of millions, and a system with more than 4 CPUs (or buying a large number of computers) is extremely expensive.
Right now, they have a couple thousand relays that can each send millions of emails per day. Cutting each of them down to 8,000 emails per day would still make a dent in spam. Also, we don't have to cut them down to absolutely zero unsolicited emails, we just have to reduce their profit until there's no incentive to keep spamming.
When's 802.11* going to support on-the-fly connection migration? Why can't I walk around a large area and switch between base stations automatically and invisibly as reception changes? That would go a long way towards making those "you're not tied down to anywhere"-type commercials a reality.
It might be more efficient to convert the fonts beforehand into polygons that can be processed by the GPU's hardware tesselator (I know the Radeons have this, not sure about the Geforces). Then they can be rasterized using a faster process.
I suspect this is what the phones really do, and whoever wrote that article chose suboptimal wording. The phone has no need to store that information or transmit it constantly. It would only query the GPS satellites and send the location when a specific request was received. The tinfoil hat brigade can continue the argument over who's sending the requests.
What Jackson didsay in that interview, as well as several other places, and which I suspect happens to directors all the time: At the end of the day or during editing, the director is faced with a number of takes, only one of which will make it into the movie. One of them has an orc flinching on the ground, one of them has Viggo Mortensen not looking in quite the right direction, one of them has less smooth camera movement than he wanted, but each of them also has aspects that are better than the other takes, and until very recently (i.e. using a computer to mix and match bits of several takes) a director had to pick the take with the least wrong and the most right and hope people ignore/forgive the wrong. Directors don't "just set up the camera and a bunch of stuff happens", but they don't have absolute, precise control over every single pixel/grain of the image (unless they're working with animation).
Depends on the computer... I just *tried* to cut myself on my G4 and it took quite some time and effort to find something potentially dangerous. This is why they cost more:P
That would allow for some interesting safety features... If the plane runs into trouble, it could simply eliminate this downward force (possibly by jettisoning its lifting surfaces) and fall *up* into an escape trajectory, from which it could enter a stable LEO orbit with maneuvering thrusters and await rescue.
Slashdot Mirror
Then you burn it to an unrestricted CD.
Hopeful comment to the effect that DVD Jon cracks this quickly.
You *did* buy a digital object. That was the original difference between Apple's store and the other DRM implementations: You have complete freedom to do anything you want with the file with the Finder. You just need authorization to use (play, burn) it in iTunes. You are free to, and Apple recommends that you, copy the file for backup purposes.
They already know you read the fucking article, your browser sends their server your IP and useragent. Exactly what do you think is going to happen to you once the NYT has your name? Ninjas assassins jumping through the window? Men is black suits with video cameras following you around? Children kidnapped for reading such a subversive site? Or even, horror or horrors, THE VERY SLIGHT CHANCE OF GETTING ADVERTISEMENTS WHICH YOU CAN IGNORE ANYWAY. OH THE HUMANITY
I think he just skipped a few steps... Let me try it.
.25*27191 + (some small numbers) = 3.8 million distinct addresses, or 35% unique. An even worse deal for the buyer than we thought :P
Even if an address appears more than once, it's not the same as the other addresses. So, each of the addresses that appears more than once counts as unique the first time it appears. So the correct equation is 1795633 + 0.5*4107246 + 0.33*287685 +
That's what I apparently failed to say: Why aren't spaceships equipped with "helicopter blades"? I mean, what if they used rockets to violate the normal behavior of LEO motion? They could place themselves in a trajectory that does not hit the atmosphere while moving too slowly to be truly orbiting, maintaining this course with constant upward thrust.
Not directly related to the Indian project, but something I've always wondered...
Why is re-entry always performed by using the atmosphere for braking? What is the main obstacle to building a craft that uses its engines to reduce its speed to well below orbital velocity while "hovering" outside the atmosphere in a non-sustainable orbital path until it's slow enough to reduce stress from air resistance and heat? Maybe the cost incurred by carrying the controlled descent system around would be offset by savings in maintenance, the exotic materials required to build the vehicle, etc.
One other advantage to a console: It's hard to use a mouse and keyboard while slouching on the sofa.
Every time you consume energy, you convert it from a useful form to a useless (heat) form which cannot be recovered, and you prevent its consumption by something else. Considering that aside from sunlight (which humans cannot use in its raw form) this planet is a closed system, any activity including "natural" subsistence farming or hunting/gathering will indirectly cause something to die. This is how life on Earth works, and it will never change (barring massive technological change or new sources of previously untapped energy).
What do you mean, censored? Can't you see the fnord?
Someone should really make a movie about a guy with this problem. Maybe he could forget why his wife died or something. I think Guy Pearce is available.
I suspect that both of these technologies (reading individual memories and erasing individual memories) are closely related and will arrive simultaneously, so this problem will not occur.
Because in the real world, it doesn't cost any money to have a building just standing there (assuming it doesn't begin to degrade through lack of maintenance). Everything in the virtual world consumes server resources, and they're trying to more closely match that consumption with their subscription structure.
It's less than a couple thousand relays times 80,000,000 emails/day.
CPU time is also finite. If 1 process can send 8,000 emails at 100% CPU usage, then 10 processes will send 800 emails each and 8,000 emails in the same time. You're right that a machine with multiple CPUs could send more email, but a 4-CPU box could still send only 32,000 emails per day instead of millions, and a system with more than 4 CPUs (or buying a large number of computers) is extremely expensive.
Right now, they have a couple thousand relays that can each send millions of emails per day. Cutting each of them down to 8,000 emails per day would still make a dent in spam. Also, we don't have to cut them down to absolutely zero unsolicited emails, we just have to reduce their profit until there's no incentive to keep spamming.
When's 802.11* going to support on-the-fly connection migration? Why can't I walk around a large area and switch between base stations automatically and invisibly as reception changes? That would go a long way towards making those "you're not tied down to anywhere"-type commercials a reality.
It might be more efficient to convert the fonts beforehand into polygons that can be processed by the GPU's hardware tesselator (I know the Radeons have this, not sure about the Geforces). Then they can be rasterized using a faster process.
I suspect this is what the phones really do, and whoever wrote that article chose suboptimal wording. The phone has no need to store that information or transmit it constantly. It would only query the GPS satellites and send the location when a specific request was received. The tinfoil hat brigade can continue the argument over who's sending the requests.
I meant to add that the number of takes is usually a very small finite number as they don't have infinite time or resources either.
What Jackson didsay in that interview, as well as several other places, and which I suspect happens to directors all the time: At the end of the day or during editing, the director is faced with a number of takes, only one of which will make it into the movie. One of them has an orc flinching on the ground, one of them has Viggo Mortensen not looking in quite the right direction, one of them has less smooth camera movement than he wanted, but each of them also has aspects that are better than the other takes, and until very recently (i.e. using a computer to mix and match bits of several takes) a director had to pick the take with the least wrong and the most right and hope people ignore/forgive the wrong. Directors don't "just set up the camera and a bunch of stuff happens", but they don't have absolute, precise control over every single pixel/grain of the image (unless they're working with animation).
Tolkien neglected to mention that Middle Earth is covered with large natural deposits of depleted uranium.
I am so taking my camera to Central Park today.
Depends on the computer... I just *tried* to cut myself on my G4 and it took quite some time and effort to find something potentially dangerous. This is why they cost more :P
That would allow for some interesting safety features... If the plane runs into trouble, it could simply eliminate this downward force (possibly by jettisoning its lifting surfaces) and fall *up* into an escape trajectory, from which it could enter a stable LEO orbit with maneuvering thrusters and await rescue.