Either way that's not cool at all. Just think if your company set this up on you, what would your reactions be?
I would prefer that my company be active in testing security in this exact fashion. Rather than imposing increasingly opressive restrictions because of what some people "might" do.
it would be better to get teh e-mail "Since 12% of you BONEHEADS didn't recognize a clear security threat, and feature XYZ was essentially opened to be compromized, it will be locked untill you boneheads demonstrate you can handle the responsibility" If the feature to be lost is significant, publicly humiliate the list that failed the security test, Lord of The Flies style justice will take over the cube farm and lessons will be learned...
Its really not hard to put bumps in glass or plastic for a touch screen.
The tactile feel of button location for a default keyboard wouold be easy, the tactile feel of keys being depressed is where teh touch screen would likely fail to be an improvement.
If teh screen is flexible, corresponding hoes or dimples could be placed behing the button locations to allow the feel of buttons being depressed. I would expect flexy touch screen button holes to be a big step back regarding tactile feel.
It might be just as easy for the touch screen to have tactile nubs in a few locations to correspond to specific keys (like the F and J keys on most keyboards) There could be a tactile grid that could correspond to all of the keys as a default keypad setup. or with a couple of reference nubs the key spacing could be adjustable, to be modified to an individuals finger length and reach.
There is the potential for a touch screen based keyboard to be more efficient than most existing laptop keypads.
Most corporate lawyers try to settle on anything that holds water that is brought against the company they are representing. They typically want to prevent the precedent of rulings against them for anything that the company did wrong or illegal (or have the details of a case made public in a trial). In these situations they are already paying the claimants legal fees, so that much would be the same.
In the situations where the case is total crap and everyone involved should already know it, the corporate lawyers can say see you in court, if the claimants don't drop it right there, they are either incredibly stupid or sure enough they might have a chance that their side will win.
If this hypothetical claim against DELL regarding a defective product is a valid claim, then it would be worth going to trial as usual. If it is a borderline claim, then the risk would obviously be more significant. In the current system what's really in place to prevent a judge from siding with DELL AND Compelling the loser to pay all of DELL's legal fees for wasting their time?
The difference is that all parties would know the risk up front.
The most significant thing that would curtail frivolous lawsuits in this country would be the requirement that whoever loses a case or drops out has to pay all of the legal fees.
The only lawsuits filed would occur when the party pressing charges is sure they have a case and a significant enough chance of winning to risk it.
In the case of the RIAA they would stand to lose far more than they could gain with their extortive tactics.
I propose Google Subpoena Gpoena - A searchable database of all of the gov't data requests and all associated legal documents, especially what is being requested and why.
The snooping would be greatly curtailed if there was no anonymity for a snooping govt. If every request was made naked in front of the teeming millions only the most vital info requests would occur.
Request for serches from machine No 000.000.000.0000 in relation to ongoing criminal investigation associated with charges of............ would seem legit.
Request for all machines that searched for "TSA" , "Liquid" , and "explosive" for ongoing terrorist investigation would suddenly seem quite dubious without better specifics.
Mod Parent up, A Pancake gets it, why doesn't ebay.
The only neg I have received was in retaliation to a neg I left after a seller didn't deliver and wouldn't respond to several e-mails inquiring about nondelivery. I left neg and suddenly the seller wanted to talk, I was still screwed out of fifty bucks, received a negative feedback and never saw the item I ordered.
Shortening the buyers feedback timeframe is also a mistake, as I always try to wait until I have the crap I ordered in hand prior to leaving feedback.
I don't, the enclosure was designed in the 1930's, it may have been the most advanced of it's time, the design turns out to be flawed (by current standards)That shouldn't automatically make the zoo at fault. If the zoo was ignorant of the enclosures shortcomings, then they are not at fault, If they knew there was a high likelihood that a tiger would escape and kill someone, then they should be held accountable.
"The question we should be asking ourselves is whether we are happy that someone who taunted a tiger died. If we are, we ought be asking why."
I'm not saying I'm happy the guy died after taunting a tiger, I'm indifferent about his death. He should be considered responsible for his actions that led to his being mauled by a tiger.
I think it's unfortunate that the world had to loose a tiger to get rid of an asshole.
Oxygen and Assholes, two things the world will never run out of.
He made some assumptions that happen to be incorrect. He assumed that the Tiger couldn't get out of it's cage, he was wrong. As soon as he began taunting the tiger with a slingshot he became complicit in his own death.
He also must have missed the episode of Dirty Jobs where they were feeding the tigers at the SF zoo, and it was quoted by the zookeeper, "The tigers we have here are the most aggressive in the world."
That information would have been useful prior to the taunting of said tiger.
Re:Why waste money on urban panic research...
on
Modeling Urban Panic
·
· Score: 1
There is actually a better movie on the subject.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0097889 Miracle Mile deals with the spread of panic started from a single phone call.
Aren't these companies good at working the books so that even the most successful movie or album is not profitable for tax purposes?
That would just make trying to hold on to the copyright after 5 years that much more expensive / less economic. They would have to either declare the profit or it would cost huge to extend the copyright. It would either force some honesty, or release more material to the commons, sort of a win win for the people.
The protection is to allow for a creator to derive profit to recoup development costs / reap rewards etc... from his/her creation (similar to the period of patent protection).
In the case of someone charging little or nothing at all for what they have created (which sounds like creation for the public good anyway) they would get the first 5 years of protection, then it becomes a creative common.
Profitability isn't necessarily linked to a dollar figure threshold, it can simply be linked to rates of use, or some function of that usage pattern over the previous 5 years.
If I create something, and make it available for cheap, and it takes off huge. The profit will be recognized, if it shortly tanks, there won't be any economic incentive to try to hold on to the copyright after 5 years (especially if it will cost money). If this hypothetical creation continues to grow in popularity even after the 5 year threshold for some time it will be economic to try to maintain control, and the copyright will be worth renewing (but only for a time, as the cost of maintaining the copyright will eventually degrade the profitability and thus economics will then force the copyrighted material into the public domain.
The fees needn't be a set rate either, they can be based on a percentage of the profit.
How about an inverse power function of the last five years profit assesed yearly?
As long as a copyright remains profitable there will be small but increasing fees, as profitibility approaches zero the fees become huge and force the holder to drop the copyright to the public domain.
You ran into the fundamental weakness in most GPS Systems. The x and y are relatively easy to get. the z is always less accurate.
I used to use a Trimble TDC1 ($12,000 near survey grade GPS) with Realtime differential correction. With 20 points collected on a position and post processing, the x and y were good to about 10 cm yet the Z was usually only good to roughly the nearest meter.
In order to get better results. The GPS antenna needed a large plate attached to act as a shield to block the radio waves from reflecting off the ground and interfering with the data collection, data collection must be more intense. We would usually collect between 1000 and 2000 points With realtime differential correction. after post processing the x and y would be good to the millimeter, yet z was then good to around the cm.
This was roughly 6-8 years ago, now with selective accuracy turned off, it is easier for lower end units to perform in the sub 10 m accuracy.
The quickest way to a decent topographic profile of a path is to record the path (as you did) and calculate the intersection of that path with as good a DEM (digital elevation model) as you can get a hold of.
My old man saw an SR-71 at Reese AFB in Texas in the '70s while he was an Airforce Instructor pilot. He always used to tell me that the pilot was wearing a misson patch that said "SR-71 Mach 5+"
Growing up I heard that line every time I pointed out that the books all say Mach 3.
You have to remember that Government agencies, while potentially clever as a whole, are still made up of government workers.
If the CIA had a program outlined to manipulate Wikipedia (without getting caught) They probably wouldn't get caught. If a handful of Public Information goons within the agency take it upon themselves to manipulate what is out there, I would not be the least bit surprised to see them behave completely ignorant of the IP trail they are leaving. I would actually expect a PI goon to think it wasn't traceable.
Slashdot Mirror
Either way that's not cool at all. Just think if your company set this up on you, what would your reactions be?
I would prefer that my company be active in testing security in this exact fashion. Rather than imposing increasingly opressive restrictions because of what some people "might" do.
it would be better to get teh e-mail "Since 12% of you BONEHEADS didn't recognize a clear security threat, and feature XYZ was essentially opened to be compromized, it will be locked untill you boneheads demonstrate you can handle the responsibility" If the feature to be lost is significant, publicly humiliate the list that failed the security test, Lord of The Flies style justice will take over the cube farm and lessons will be learned...
Its really not hard to put bumps in glass or plastic for a touch screen.
The tactile feel of button location for a default keyboard wouold be easy, the tactile feel of keys being depressed is where teh touch screen would likely fail to be an improvement.
If teh screen is flexible, corresponding hoes or dimples could be placed behing the button locations to allow the feel of buttons being depressed. I would expect flexy touch screen button holes to be a big step back regarding tactile feel.
It might be just as easy for the touch screen to have tactile nubs in a few locations to correspond to specific keys (like the F and J keys on most keyboards) There could be a tactile grid that could correspond to all of the keys as a default keypad setup. or with a couple of reference nubs the key spacing could be adjustable, to be modified to an individuals finger length and reach.
There is the potential for a touch screen based keyboard to be more efficient than most existing laptop keypads.
That's not exactly how it would play out.
Most corporate lawyers try to settle on anything that holds water that is brought against the company they are representing. They typically want to prevent the precedent of rulings against them for anything that the company did wrong or illegal (or have the details of a case made public in a trial). In these situations they are already paying the claimants legal fees, so that much would be the same.
In the situations where the case is total crap and everyone involved should already know it, the corporate lawyers can say see you in court, if the claimants don't drop it right there, they are either incredibly stupid or sure enough they might have a chance that their side will win.
If this hypothetical claim against DELL regarding a defective product is a valid claim, then it would be worth going to trial as usual. If it is a borderline claim, then the risk would obviously be more significant. In the current system what's really in place to prevent a judge from siding with DELL AND Compelling the loser to pay all of DELL's legal fees for wasting their time?
The difference is that all parties would know the risk up front.
The most significant thing that would curtail frivolous lawsuits in this country would be the requirement that whoever loses a case or drops out has to pay all of the legal fees.
The only lawsuits filed would occur when the party pressing charges is sure they have a case and a significant enough chance of winning to risk it.
In the case of the RIAA they would stand to lose far more than they could gain with their extortive tactics.
I propose Google Subpoena Gpoena - A searchable database of all of the gov't data requests and all associated legal documents, especially what is being requested and why.
... ... ... ... would seem legit.
The snooping would be greatly curtailed if there was no anonymity for a snooping govt. If every request was made naked in front of the teeming millions only the most vital info requests would occur.
Request for serches from machine No 000.000.000.0000 in relation to ongoing criminal investigation associated with charges of
Request for all machines that searched for "TSA" , "Liquid" , and "explosive" for ongoing terrorist investigation would suddenly seem quite dubious without better specifics.
Never underestimate the bandwidth of a station wagon.
Yes, yes, but who would elect a heating engineer wanted for freelance subversion?
Hate to break it to you but that was carbonite not carbonate.
Carbonate is the CO3 ion that makes limestone (CaCO3) and dolomite (CaMg(CO3)2)
It would have been interesting if Han was turned to limestone but a marble statue of Han would have been a little too Clash of the Titans.
Mod Parent up, A Pancake gets it, why doesn't ebay.
The only neg I have received was in retaliation to a neg I left after a seller didn't deliver and wouldn't respond to several e-mails inquiring about nondelivery. I left neg and suddenly the seller wanted to talk, I was still screwed out of fifty bucks, received a negative feedback and never saw the item I ordered.
Shortening the buyers feedback timeframe is also a mistake, as I always try to wait until I have the crap I ordered in hand prior to leaving feedback.
"Very often when we screw up our life it brings others down with us."
Some people suck, therefore we should all give up something.
Policy that aims to account for the least common denominator leads to a world of mediocrity, and in the end, we will all suck.
"We agree that the zoo was at fault."
I don't, the enclosure was designed in the 1930's, it may have been the most advanced of it's time, the design turns out to be flawed (by current standards)That shouldn't automatically make the zoo at fault. If the zoo was ignorant of the enclosures shortcomings, then they are not at fault, If they knew there was a high likelihood that a tiger would escape and kill someone, then they should be held accountable.
"The question we should be asking ourselves is whether we are happy that someone who taunted a tiger died. If we are, we ought be asking why."
I'm not saying I'm happy the guy died after taunting a tiger, I'm indifferent about his death. He should be considered responsible for his actions that led to his being mauled by a tiger.
I think it's unfortunate that the world had to loose a tiger to get rid of an asshole.
Oxygen and Assholes, two things the world will never run out of.
Deserves got nothing to do with it,
He made some assumptions that happen to be incorrect. He assumed that the Tiger couldn't get out of it's cage, he was wrong. As soon as he began taunting the tiger with a slingshot he became complicit in his own death.
He also must have missed the episode of Dirty Jobs where they were feeding the tigers at the SF zoo, and it was quoted by the zookeeper,
"The tigers we have here are the most aggressive in the world."
That information would have been useful prior to the taunting of said tiger.
ICANN has freedom?
There is actually a better movie on the subject. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0097889
Miracle Mile deals with the spread of panic started from a single phone call.
Or you could say a Twinkie approximately 10^38 km long and weighing 3.5*10^37 metric tons.
Or 3.685*10^29 AU, (3.24810^24 Parsecs), 1.05*10^25 light years, room for about a billion of these in the universe!
"That's a really big Twinkie"
HDF is usualy called masonite
LDF is usually the particle board that cheap furniture is made of
Both quite common
That would just make trying to hold on to the copyright after 5 years that much more expensive / less economic. They would have to either declare the profit or it would cost huge to extend the copyright. It would either force some honesty, or release more material to the commons, sort of a win win for the people.
The protection is to allow for a creator to derive profit to recoup development costs / reap rewards etc... from his/her creation (similar to the period of patent protection).
In the case of someone charging little or nothing at all for what they have created (which sounds like creation for the public good anyway) they would get the first 5 years of protection, then it becomes a creative common.
Profitability isn't necessarily linked to a dollar figure threshold, it can simply be linked to rates of use, or some function of that usage pattern over the previous 5 years.
If I create something, and make it available for cheap, and it takes off huge. The profit will be recognized, if it shortly tanks, there won't be any economic incentive to try to hold on to the copyright after 5 years (especially if it will cost money). If this hypothetical creation continues to grow in popularity even after the 5 year threshold for some time it will be economic to try to maintain control, and the copyright will be worth renewing (but only for a time, as the cost of maintaining the copyright will eventually degrade the profitability and thus economics will then force the copyrighted material into the public domain.
The fees needn't be a set rate either, they can be based on a percentage of the profit.
How about an inverse power function of the last five years profit assesed yearly?
As long as a copyright remains profitable there will be small but increasing fees, as profitibility approaches zero the fees become huge and force the holder to drop the copyright to the public domain.
You ran into the fundamental weakness in most GPS Systems. The x and y are relatively easy to get. the z is always less accurate.
I used to use a Trimble TDC1 ($12,000 near survey grade GPS) with Realtime differential correction.
With 20 points collected on a position and post processing, the x and y were good to about 10 cm yet the Z was usually only good to roughly the nearest meter.
In order to get better results. The GPS antenna needed a large plate attached to act as a shield to block the radio waves from reflecting off the ground and interfering with the data collection, data collection must be more intense. We would usually collect between 1000 and 2000 points With realtime differential correction. after post processing the x and y would be good to the millimeter, yet z was then good to around the cm.
This was roughly 6-8 years ago, now with selective accuracy turned off, it is easier for lower end units to perform in the sub 10 m accuracy.
The quickest way to a decent topographic profile of a path is to record the path (as you did) and calculate the intersection of that path with as good a DEM (digital elevation model) as you can get a hold of.
3)Something else = ???
4) Profit!!!
There Fixed that for you.
My old man saw an SR-71 at Reese AFB in Texas in the '70s while he was an Airforce Instructor pilot. He always used to tell me that the pilot was wearing a misson patch that said "SR-71 Mach 5+"
Growing up I heard that line every time I pointed out that the books all say Mach 3.
You have to remember that Government agencies, while potentially clever as a whole, are still made up of government workers.
If the CIA had a program outlined to manipulate Wikipedia (without getting caught) They probably wouldn't get caught. If a handful of Public Information goons within the agency take it upon themselves to manipulate what is out there, I would not be the least bit surprised to see them behave completely ignorant of the IP trail they are leaving. I would actually expect a PI goon to think it wasn't traceable.
If you use the half your age + 7 rule, it crosses at 14 years old.
Thus dating for anyone younger than 14 is verboten.