OK, so in one hour with close proximity (measured in feet) to the controller, they can crack it.
Give a guy (valet parking anyone?) your keys and he can copy it in 5 seconds.
This is not news at all.
You want to impress/scare me? Tell me they can do it without the remote.
Step 2. Red Cross organization, havign the name RED CROSS, began using a RED CROSS as their symbol.
Step 3. Johnson and Johnson created 6 years later.
Step 4. J&J begin using a Red Cross, made popular by the RED CROSS ORGANIZATION as a logo. They do so without paying the charity anything, but that is OK, the Charity does not care.
Step 5. Congress approves Red Cross as a charity.
Step 6. More than 100 years go by.
Step 7. The Charity Red Cross makes a small amount of money licensing some buisnesses to use the Red Cross as a logo.
Step 8. J&J, forgetting that they STOLE the Red Cross from a charity called RED CROSS, sues the Charity for trademark breach.
From my reading of history, that is an accurate representation of what happened. The Red Cross charity existed first, the J&J company illegally used their logo without paying the Red Cross for it, and now 100 years later forgot about their crime.
I think by Semantically different they meant real/meaningfull/non-pointless differences.
Effectively that means that just as you personally can recognize a bunch of pictures as all being "japanese porn" or all being "pictures of boats", or all being "pictures of men in suits", so can the computer.
And that number of different categories that humans take pictures of is not that large, probably less than 200,000 different categorizable subjects.
So with 1 million pictures, you have 5 of any category and can cut/paste pieces in without making it look obviously cut/paste.
1. He said per person, not per student. So cut your figure by about 1/10
2. He said 'the US spends', and by that I bet he meant actual cash outlays by the federal US government, not including payments made by the student themselves, their parents, or the states.
That sounds to me like $50/citizen might be how much the congress budgets for.
I don't consider it to be at all. Bladerunner was dark, but mainly for the replicants, not the humans. Humans were doing relatively nicely in my opinion.
And living in NYC, I am pretty much in the metro-city he thought of as being nasty and thought that the rest of the country would become more NYish than NYish. Honestly, living in NYC is nicer than most of the sub-urbs.
Yeah, there will always be poor people, and always be some crime. But we are having LESS crime and our standard of poor has radically shifted. 100 years ago, poor meant starving. They would LAUGH at the idea of what we consider to be poor now adays. Any society that has 300 lb 'poor' people is doing far better than what Gibson thought was likely.
What a load of unproven, baseless, naive pipedreams. You basically suggest that:
All of the totally and completely non-probems that people find annoying are in fact problems and can be 'solved'. Once we do solve them, we will suddenly cease to be what we have evolved to be: human.
I don't know the future but I would bet my life about the following:
1. We already 'solved' the 19th century's energy, food and mortality 'puzzles': I.E. During the 20th century we found a way to give a 19th century culture all the energy and food it wanted, and basically doubled the adult lifespan of a 19th century man.
2. Doing so we of course raised the bar, needing more energy, food and wanting even longer life span. I am postive that again in the 21st century, we will of course solve the 20th century's 'problems' you mentioned, getting each person more than enough energy, food and doubling the adult life span again.
3. And just like happened to us, the 22nd century people will take for granted their extended energy, food and lifespan and will continue to want MORE. Because that is what it means to be human - It is the ROAD, not the destination that is important.
4. 1,000 or even 10,000 years from now, no matter how much energy, food, and lifespan we have we will still want more.
5. Things in the bottom of a steep gravity well will STILL be more interesting and create desire for us, than the things we create in the wilds of space. If for nothing else than the mere fact that WE did not create it, so it would be NEW.
6. That same new and interesing desire will be JUST as desireable to the politicians as it will be to the tourists. They will still want it, not just for a visit.
7. Tourism is not harmless. It is destructive. Ask the people that run any national park - tourism does huge amounts of damage.
To sum up, humans are by nature explorers and builders. We will continue to explore and BUILD everywhere. We are slowly learning how to build without destroying what other humans value. The first few alien races will of course be alien and I predict we WILL piss them off by trying to create things using resources they value and this will lead to war. It will take quite some time for us to learn to co-exist peacefully with aliens, because over the past 30,000 years we have not yet learned to co-exist peacefully with ourselves.
You did not experience the Segway publicity machine.
At one point, Segway specific denied that they had teleportation.
Now, I doubt that anyone seriously believed they had teleportation, but there was so much publicity that someone actually asked them about it.
In other words, they were putting out enough moronic doubletalking hype that intelligent people were thinking maybe they had really done a major breakthrough and could do something like a jetpack.
The Australian paper has MUCH more information, most of which is VERY important. Things like the fact that a single pritner was at worst, as bad as a single ciggarette. Things like the fact that they admitted no knoweldge of whether the particles were bad for you. Things like most (more than 1/2) of the printers they checked did not emit any particles.
1. It is exactly the kind of scare tactic news stories that papers spread when EVERY scientist in the world disagrees with them.
2. It is being reported by the BBC, but Australian scientists made the claim. Could the Australians not find a SINGLE Australian paper that thought they were believeable as well as sensational?
So does Sunlight. Causes skin cancer. Better never go out in the sun.
Look, Microwaves and other radiation has been THOROUGHLY studied over the past 50 years. Yes, 20 years ago you might have been able to buy a consumer item that damaged your body. But we stopped selling sillyness like x-ray shoe fitting machines long ago.
Any modern piece of radio based equiptment will NOT harm you, even if you hold your cell phone to your head and run it 24 hours a day.
There are lots of things we don't know about - new medicines, new drugs, new kinds of pollution. But Radio waves are OLD news. We know what they do.
LOTS of other people live no more than 200 m away from such towers. Statistics clearly show that what happen to you is an isolated instace. That means either:
1. You are being affected by something else. Maybe you are drinking contaminated water and are so obsessed about the harmless tower you never thought to check your water. Duh.
2. There is something special about YOUR PARTICULAR tower that makes it far more deadly than any other tower in history. Perhaps you should see if it is run by aliens intent on taking over the world. Or maybe someone made it out of the dead bonus of native americans. Or perhaps it is made from depleted uranium.
3. That shear random chance means that in any give year, there will be one apartment building that has 7 residents getting and dieing of cancer and you are too stubborn to consider that sometimes CANCER HAPPENS.
Honestly, #1 seems the most likely to me. #3 is a close second. But who knows? Maybe #2 is happening. It would certainly make for a far more interesting newspaper article.
That is crap. They clearly have standing to sue. They represent people with pending business before the USPO, they are in immenent danger of an irreversible harm (having an unqualified person declare their patent invalid, opening it up to the entire world to steal).
Redressability is simple, having the federal government follow the law.
I disagree strongly. I support the Consitution of the US. Free Speech.
It is not "Free speech as long as you don't use words that I REALLY dislike." It is FREE SPEECH. Yeah, they put in some stuff to stop outright lies and dangerously stupid things (no yelling fire in a crowded theater), but that is about it.
There are two views of child rearing:
One: Protect the children!!!
Two: TEACH the children.
You can NOT do both. When you teach, you expose them to dangerous ideas. That includes words that you are only supposed to use when you are really angry. If the kids use them in the wrong times ("Xuxk off little sister") than that is wrong and should be retaught. But if a kid sees someone run his mother over with a car and drive away, than that little, tiny 5 year old should be screaming "COME BACK YOU FUCKIN' A HOLE, YOU RAN OVER MY MOM!"
You do realize that for those few hundred dollars you get the ORIGINAL ARTISTS singing the song?
Look, if you could pay $500 bucks to get the still living Beatles to record a version of "Hey Jude" using your name, wouldn't you do it?
I would pay that much cash in an instant, and declare it my 'theme song'.
Play it my birthday, etc.
That hotmail and goodmail should not be charging people to unblock spam.
Instead they should simply refuse to unblock spam, period.
Yes, that means that newsletters like this would not get through.
I have a Phone at home. If some insane lunatic started up the idea of calling all his friends having them call all of their friends, as a means of sending out important news, I would laugh at him.
I also laugh at anyone, even this 'nice' newsletter that actually thinks EMAIL is an apropriate means of obtaining this information.
RSS is one way to go.
ANOTHER way to go is messageboard style.
There are still more ways to send out information. You can take an applet that you give to your subscribers that does something similar to hat phone idea does. While it does not work on a phone, it would work on the internet.
But the IMMENSE problem of spam pretty much means that NO, NEWSLETTERS ARE NOT APPROPRIATE FOR EMAIL.
Find another solution, the one you are trying is causing huge problems for the interent. It is NOT our job to help you perpetuate a BAD idea, no matter how much your personal non-profit benefits from the bad idea.
The one advantage we have is that by definintion they don't get along with anyone, not even other islamic fundamentalists. Just like in Iran, they are likley to start suicide bombing each other's churches before they ever become the majority.
While I may trust this CURRENT government to know what I am doing, we have a democracy. I don't trust the unknown, possibly Islamic fundamentalist government we may have in 30 years not to hunt me down and kill me for being jewish.
While I personally have nothing to hide, I have friends and family that occasionally come over to my house, and use my phone/computer/etc. I do not know that THEY have nothing to hide - specifcally my 80 year old grandma that has glaucoma and lung cancer cooks home made brownies and I don't know that she has not made some special ones just for her.
The question is NOT "what do I have to hide", but instead "what makes you so freakin paranoid that you are wasting your time (and my tax dollars) investigating EVERYONE instead of the few people you have actual evidence of wrong doing"
Trust is a two way street. You want me to trust you with my embarrasing secrets? fine, you have to trust us with yours. Like say, who did you speak to about those secret energy meetings....
I know about an use Full screen mode. This is a general idea about all GUI. Basically, we want Full Screen mode for all windows based programs, as the default, similar to the way everything has a Minimize window.
Also, what the author was talking about was more than just hiding the base menus. In effect there are two modes:
1. Full Screen Mode.
2. Expanded Menu mode
That is, whenever you are not using full screen, you don't get a small, limited menu of commands, but a full list of all your top level menus pulled down.
Slashdot Mirror
OK, so in one hour with close proximity (measured in feet) to the controller, they can crack it. Give a guy (valet parking anyone?) your keys and he can copy it in 5 seconds. This is not news at all. You want to impress/scare me? Tell me they can do it without the remote.
Why else do you think he did it anonymously?
Step 1. Red Cross created.
Step 2. Red Cross organization, havign the name RED CROSS, began using a RED CROSS as their symbol.
Step 3. Johnson and Johnson created 6 years later.
Step 4. J&J begin using a Red Cross, made popular by the RED CROSS ORGANIZATION as a logo. They do so without paying the charity anything, but that is OK, the Charity does not care.
Step 5. Congress approves Red Cross as a charity.
Step 6. More than 100 years go by.
Step 7. The Charity Red Cross makes a small amount of money licensing some buisnesses to use the Red Cross as a logo.
Step 8. J&J, forgetting that they STOLE the Red Cross from a charity called RED CROSS, sues the Charity for trademark breach.
From my reading of history, that is an accurate representation of what happened. The Red Cross charity existed first, the J&J company illegally used their logo without paying the Red Cross for it, and now 100 years later forgot about their crime.
Effectively that means that just as you personally can recognize a bunch of pictures as all being "japanese porn" or all being "pictures of boats", or all being "pictures of men in suits", so can the computer.
And that number of different categories that humans take pictures of is not that large, probably less than 200,000 different categorizable subjects.
So with 1 million pictures, you have 5 of any category and can cut/paste pieces in without making it look obviously cut/paste.
Give us another couple of years of having russians spread plutonium throughout the world and we will start having a lot MORE genetic diversity.
I for one will welcome our two headed overlords.
1. He said per person, not per student. So cut your figure by about 1/10 2. He said 'the US spends', and by that I bet he meant actual cash outlays by the federal US government, not including payments made by the student themselves, their parents, or the states. That sounds to me like $50/citizen might be how much the congress budgets for.
Yeah, there will always be poor people, and always be some crime. But we are having LESS crime and our standard of poor has radically shifted. 100 years ago, poor meant starving. They would LAUGH at the idea of what we consider to be poor now adays. Any society that has 300 lb 'poor' people is doing far better than what Gibson thought was likely.
Me, I am happy that Gibson finally admits he has no freakin' clue what the future will bring.
Maybe he will stop writing about the dark ages as if they were coming to us instead of long past.
All of the totally and completely non-probems that people find annoying are in fact problems and can be 'solved'. Once we do solve them, we will suddenly cease to be what we have evolved to be: human.
I don't know the future but I would bet my life about the following:
1. We already 'solved' the 19th century's energy, food and mortality 'puzzles': I.E. During the 20th century we found a way to give a 19th century culture all the energy and food it wanted, and basically doubled the adult lifespan of a 19th century man.
2. Doing so we of course raised the bar, needing more energy, food and wanting even longer life span. I am postive that again in the 21st century, we will of course solve the 20th century's 'problems' you mentioned, getting each person more than enough energy, food and doubling the adult life span again.
3. And just like happened to us, the 22nd century people will take for granted their extended energy, food and lifespan and will continue to want MORE. Because that is what it means to be human - It is the ROAD, not the destination that is important.
4. 1,000 or even 10,000 years from now, no matter how much energy, food, and lifespan we have we will still want more.
5. Things in the bottom of a steep gravity well will STILL be more interesting and create desire for us, than the things we create in the wilds of space. If for nothing else than the mere fact that WE did not create it, so it would be NEW.
6. That same new and interesing desire will be JUST as desireable to the politicians as it will be to the tourists. They will still want it, not just for a visit.
7. Tourism is not harmless. It is destructive. Ask the people that run any national park - tourism does huge amounts of damage.
To sum up, humans are by nature explorers and builders. We will continue to explore and BUILD everywhere. We are slowly learning how to build without destroying what other humans value. The first few alien races will of course be alien and I predict we WILL piss them off by trying to create things using resources they value and this will lead to war. It will take quite some time for us to learn to co-exist peacefully with aliens, because over the past 30,000 years we have not yet learned to co-exist peacefully with ourselves.
At one point, Segway specific denied that they had teleportation.
Now, I doubt that anyone seriously believed they had teleportation, but there was so much publicity that someone actually asked them about it.
In other words, they were putting out enough moronic doubletalking hype that intelligent people were thinking maybe they had really done a major breakthrough and could do something like a jetpack.
Turned out to be a joke THEY called Segway.
But NO, it is NOT the same story.
The Australian paper has MUCH more information, most of which is VERY important. Things like the fact that a single pritner was at worst, as bad as a single ciggarette. Things like the fact that they admitted no knoweldge of whether the particles were bad for you. Things like most (more than 1/2) of the printers they checked did not emit any particles.
1. It is exactly the kind of scare tactic news stories that papers spread when EVERY scientist in the world disagrees with them. 2. It is being reported by the BBC, but Australian scientists made the claim. Could the Australians not find a SINGLE Australian paper that thought they were believeable as well as sensational?
Look, Microwaves and other radiation has been THOROUGHLY studied over the past 50 years. Yes, 20 years ago you might have been able to buy a consumer item that damaged your body. But we stopped selling sillyness like x-ray shoe fitting machines long ago.
Any modern piece of radio based equiptment will NOT harm you, even if you hold your cell phone to your head and run it 24 hours a day.
There are lots of things we don't know about - new medicines, new drugs, new kinds of pollution. But Radio waves are OLD news. We know what they do.
1. You are being affected by something else. Maybe you are drinking contaminated water and are so obsessed about the harmless tower you never thought to check your water. Duh.
2. There is something special about YOUR PARTICULAR tower that makes it far more deadly than any other tower in history. Perhaps you should see if it is run by aliens intent on taking over the world. Or maybe someone made it out of the dead bonus of native americans. Or perhaps it is made from depleted uranium.
3. That shear random chance means that in any give year, there will be one apartment building that has 7 residents getting and dieing of cancer and you are too stubborn to consider that sometimes CANCER HAPPENS.
Honestly, #1 seems the most likely to me. #3 is a close second. But who knows? Maybe #2 is happening. It would certainly make for a far more interesting newspaper article.
Please keep in mind you are reading a non-technical summary of a real test.
The phone mast/cell tower crap is non-scientific feat of technology. There is NO basis for it, except mass hysteria.
Redressability is simple, having the federal government follow the law.
It is not "Free speech as long as you don't use words that I REALLY dislike." It is FREE SPEECH. Yeah, they put in some stuff to stop outright lies and dangerously stupid things (no yelling fire in a crowded theater), but that is about it.
There are two views of child rearing:
One: Protect the children!!!
Two: TEACH the children.
You can NOT do both. When you teach, you expose them to dangerous ideas. That includes words that you are only supposed to use when you are really angry. If the kids use them in the wrong times ("Xuxk off little sister") than that is wrong and should be retaught. But if a kid sees someone run his mother over with a car and drive away, than that little, tiny 5 year old should be screaming "COME BACK YOU FUCKIN' A HOLE, YOU RAN OVER MY MOM!"
No. The poster needs a lesson in writting. Rule 1 = Put your topic in the first sentence, and summarize your argument/belief in the first paragraph.
You do realize that for those few hundred dollars you get the ORIGINAL ARTISTS singing the song? Look, if you could pay $500 bucks to get the still living Beatles to record a version of "Hey Jude" using your name, wouldn't you do it? I would pay that much cash in an instant, and declare it my 'theme song'. Play it my birthday, etc.
Oh, god, this will totally destroy Adrian Monk. His show just got cancelled.
Instead they should simply refuse to unblock spam, period.
Yes, that means that newsletters like this would not get through.
I have a Phone at home. If some insane lunatic started up the idea of calling all his friends having them call all of their friends, as a means of sending out important news, I would laugh at him.
I also laugh at anyone, even this 'nice' newsletter that actually thinks EMAIL is an apropriate means of obtaining this information.
RSS is one way to go.
ANOTHER way to go is messageboard style.
There are still more ways to send out information. You can take an applet that you give to your subscribers that does something similar to hat phone idea does. While it does not work on a phone, it would work on the internet.
But the IMMENSE problem of spam pretty much means that NO, NEWSLETTERS ARE NOT APPROPRIATE FOR EMAIL.
Find another solution, the one you are trying is causing huge problems for the interent. It is NOT our job to help you perpetuate a BAD idea, no matter how much your personal non-profit benefits from the bad idea.
The one advantage we have is that by definintion they don't get along with anyone, not even other islamic fundamentalists. Just like in Iran, they are likley to start suicide bombing each other's churches before they ever become the majority.
While I may trust this CURRENT government to know what I am doing, we have a democracy. I don't trust the unknown, possibly Islamic fundamentalist government we may have in 30 years not to hunt me down and kill me for being jewish.
While I personally have nothing to hide, I have friends and family that occasionally come over to my house, and use my phone/computer/etc. I do not know that THEY have nothing to hide - specifcally my 80 year old grandma that has glaucoma and lung cancer cooks home made brownies and I don't know that she has not made some special ones just for her.
The question is NOT "what do I have to hide", but instead "what makes you so freakin paranoid that you are wasting your time (and my tax dollars) investigating EVERYONE instead of the few people you have actual evidence of wrong doing"
Trust is a two way street. You want me to trust you with my embarrasing secrets? fine, you have to trust us with yours. Like say, who did you speak to about those secret energy meetings....
Also, what the author was talking about was more than just hiding the base menus. In effect there are two modes:
1. Full Screen Mode.
2. Expanded Menu mode
That is, whenever you are not using full screen, you don't get a small, limited menu of commands, but a full list of all your top level menus pulled down.