The parent post is right. You want to look up a psychoacoustic phenomenon known as masking. Some small changes to a signal are perceptually undetectable; other small changes are detectable.
And by the way: when running perceptual tests, whether it's wine tasting or audio equipment, you need to do an "AAB" test. Most comparisons are "AB" comparisons where you tell the subject: "here are two different samples; which one is 'better'?" Telling the subject to expect a difference will skew the results. The fix is to present the subject with a control signal, and then two test signals (in randomized order), one of which is identical to the control (i.e. either "AAB" or "ABA"). Then see if the subject can do better than random chance in identifying the "B" sample.
It's because CO2 is a greenhouse gas -- it raises the overall temp of the planet, which may cause havoc. H20 is not a greenhouse gas. Also, compute the average time for a carbon atom to be captured by a plant, then returned to the atmosphere -- it's about 5000 years. Do the same for a water molecule to go from atmosphere to river and back to atmosphere -- it's a few months. Thus the atmosphere is better equipped to shed excess water than excess C02 (it's called rain!).
then there's Eudaemonic Pie by Thomas Bass. About how some tech smart folks attempted to win at roulette by digitally modelling the spinning wheels (hint: the ball usually falls off the high side of a tilted wheel, and they're all slightly tilted). The Eudaemons built some of the first wearable computers. A fun read.
I see a market here: howzabout selling software that (a) appears to be a virus infection -- well, OK, a voluntary virus; and (b) downloads porn automagically! Not only does it save typing and clicking, it provides a tested legal defense for your first arrest! Plus, we can have the porn providers pay to have their ad banners downloaded! Quick, get me to a venture capitalist!
In Scott Ritter's case, he was accused propositioned sex from (who he thought) an underage girl over the internet. In fact it was an undercover police officer.
Actually, according to the article, Ritter is alleged to have "had a sexual discussion." This is not at all the same as propositioning.
Was he tried? Was he found guilty? The article doesn't say. What it does say is "The case was sealed, and Colonie officials declined to release the arrest records, explaining the matter was adjourned in local court in contemplation of dismissal."
In this country, a person is innocent until proven guilty. So accordng to the information provided, Ritter is currently innocent of the charges, and likely to remain that way.
There is no reason to release the arrest record, and in fact County officials refused to release the arrest record. In such cases its unethical and likely illegal to release the arrest record.
This leak sounds to me more like the tactics of a police state than a democracy that values freedom. Which is the greater crime; Ritter's alleged misdemeanor, or the leak? Do you think this leak will even be investigated? I'm not holding my breath.
Sounds interesting, but how quietly does it run?
The article never mentions noise/quiet. The case comes with 2 6cm fans; are they needed? The PSU is a 200W microATX that comes with the case; is it quiet? The AthlonXP 1.47GHz runs pretty hot; what kind of CPU cooler does it need, and how quiet is that? A noisy media PC is not much fun...
Maybe the fairest thing for Intel to do is find some way to dectect and record if a chip is ever overclocked. The basic problem with overclocking is those unscrupulous folks who drive a chip to it's death, then try and take it in for a refund. If the chip could detect and record warranty-voiding settings, then overclockers wouldn't be able to void the warranty.
Personally, I'd like to be able to underclock better so it would be easier to built a really quiet PC. Although there are a few articles about it, silent PCs are an underserved area of the market.
Today's Checkpoint devices don't use GUIDs. They use the same tag for everything. There is absolutely zero reason you couldn't do the same with RFID tags.
Ah, but Today's Checkpoint devices must be removed at the point of sale. We're talking about doing theft detection with actual existing RFID tags that don't turn off. Since they don't turn off, the only way to distinguish between different pairs of tagged red knee-high socks is by having different info in the tags. Can you make a modifiable ID tag as cheaply as the fixed ID tags? Somehow I doubt it. But thank you for playing.
Yes, true, for now. But it would be better theft prevention for manufacturers to hide the tag deeper in the clothing. Once thieves learn the RFID is in an easily removed appendage, they'll do the obvious thing.
Benetton, which makes casual clothes and sportswear for men, women and children, said it would weave the technology into the collar tags of clothes that cost at least $15 to keep track of them as they ship....
... The tagging system may also save the company money by reducing theft. The RFID tags can be programmed to set off an alarm if someone leaves a store without paying for an item.
That article makes it sound like the RFID would be in the cloth collar tag, not the paper tear-off pricetag. And if the RFID is for theft prevention, it would have to be able to distinguish between different pairs of same-size olive-green Khakis, so there must be a globally unique ID, not just a generic description. And if you want really good theft prevention, it would be smarter to hide the tag or else thieves can easily remove it.
So, a globally unique ID sewn into your clothing; readable wherever you go with the proper equipment. What's not to like? It means institutions that choose to can automatically and cheaply start assembling a history of which RFID tags go where, and when. Still not scared? Next step: when the cops come to pick you up as a "material witness" they can easily scan your clothing and compare it to the RFID histories. Is everyone going to feel just as free to worship unpopular religions and excercise their legal right to dissent against the powers-that-be if such technology becomes widespread?
Now do you start to see a chilling effect? Part of the danger comes from the globally unique ID; the rest comes from the ease of assembling RFID time&place databases. It could be the thin edge of the wedge of a major loss of privacy.
Things like the Bennetton RFID tags are usually presented to the consumer with the argument that you have to give up a little privacy for the extra convenience of [whatever they're selling]. The company usually gets a benefit of additional marketing info, which is their real incentive.
In the case of the Bennetton tags, there wasn't even any additional convenience for the customer; just a straightforward loss of privacy ("wow, she's back for the 3rd day, still wearing the same jeans!"). So I think that died because they couldn't come up with any "convenient" excuse for tagging your clothes.
My claim is that even in other cases, like FastLane style auto toll collection, there's no technical or engineering reason you have to give up privacy for the convenience. Instead, the designers and/or operators of the systems want the information, so they provide a benefit in order to justify collecting the information. In the case of auto toll collection, as pointed out in here, your toll debit card could be purchased anonymously. This has all the convenience and none of the privacy intrusion of existing systems.
But what's the big deal about privacy anyway? My claim is that when times are good, privacy doesn't matter. But when times are bad, it's too late!
Innocent databases can be misused in terrible ways. When the Nazis conquered cities, they would use library borrowing records to find Jewish people. How long until the next J. Edgar Hoover or Joe McCarthy comes along and abuses his position of power? (Yeah, I know, some would say Ashcroft is already worse; I don't want to start that argument). My point is that it has happened here, and likely will again. The potential unforseen future misuse of databases is what makes me a privacy advocate.
So, good riddance to Bennetton's RFID tags, and let's get rid of the false dichotomy that's used to insinuate similar privacy invasions!
I just installed RH9 (shrike) on a dual P4 mobo. It installed both an SMP and a regular kernel, automatically, whereas RH8 only installed a regular kernel (i.e. failed to sense dual CPUs). So this better sensing of multiple CPUs is an advantage in RH9.
While I have your attention, I'm gonna make a tiny little rant about gnome, which I generally like. In gnome-1.4, gnome-terminal takes arguments like --foreground=lightblue --background=black.
This annoyed me when I first encountered it because it breaks the standard color choice arguments that work in so many X11 appsl for example: xterm -fg lightblue -bg black.
But now gnome 2 breaks the old 1.4 convention! As far as I can tell, the only way to choose your colors is to create a bunch of profiles, and then use --window-with-profile. This business of manually creating profiles is doubly annoying!
The reason it matters to me is that I admin several boxes, and I use different color codes for terminals and editors on the different boxes. I have to keep on re-creating my admin scheme with each new iteration of gnome. Why keep changing it?
Slashdot Mirror
Free software is about choice. 'nuff said.
And by the way: when running perceptual tests, whether it's wine tasting or audio equipment, you need to do an "AAB" test. Most comparisons are "AB" comparisons where you tell the subject: "here are two different samples; which one is 'better'?" Telling the subject to expect a difference will skew the results. The fix is to present the subject with a control signal, and then two test signals (in randomized order), one of which is identical to the control (i.e. either "AAB" or "ABA"). Then see if the subject can do better than random chance in identifying the "B" sample.
I see a market here: howzabout selling software that (a) appears to be a virus infection -- well, OK, a voluntary virus; and (b) downloads porn automagically! Not only does it save typing and clicking, it provides a tested legal defense for your first arrest! Plus, we can have the porn providers pay to have their ad banners downloaded! Quick, get me to a venture capitalist!
Actually, according to the article, Ritter is alleged to have "had a sexual discussion." This is not at all the same as propositioning.
Was he tried? Was he found guilty? The article doesn't say. What it does say is "The case was sealed, and Colonie officials declined to release the arrest records, explaining the matter was adjourned in local court in contemplation of dismissal."
In this country, a person is innocent until proven guilty. So accordng to the information provided, Ritter is currently innocent of the charges, and likely to remain that way.
There is no reason to release the arrest record, and in fact County officials refused to release the arrest record. In such cases its unethical and likely illegal to release the arrest record.
This leak sounds to me more like the tactics of a police state than a democracy that values freedom. Which is the greater crime; Ritter's alleged misdemeanor, or the leak? Do you think this leak will even be investigated? I'm not holding my breath.
Sounds interesting, but how quietly does it run? The article never mentions noise/quiet. The case comes with 2 6cm fans; are they needed? The PSU is a 200W microATX that comes with the case; is it quiet? The AthlonXP 1.47GHz runs pretty hot; what kind of CPU cooler does it need, and how quiet is that? A noisy media PC is not much fun...
Personally, I'd like to be able to underclock better so it would be easier to built a really quiet PC. Although there are a few articles about it, silent PCs are an underserved area of the market.
Ah, but Today's Checkpoint devices must be removed at the point of sale. We're talking about doing theft detection with actual existing RFID tags that don't turn off. Since they don't turn off, the only way to distinguish between different pairs of tagged red knee-high socks is by having different info in the tags. Can you make a modifiable ID tag as cheaply as the fixed ID tags? Somehow I doubt it. But thank you for playing.
Yes, true, for now. But it would be better theft prevention for manufacturers to hide the tag deeper in the clothing. Once thieves learn the RFID is in an easily removed appendage, they'll do the obvious thing.
Here's a quote from a wired article
That article makes it sound like the RFID would be in the cloth collar tag, not the paper tear-off pricetag. And if the RFID is for theft prevention, it would have to be able to distinguish between different pairs of same-size olive-green Khakis, so there must be a globally unique ID, not just a generic description. And if you want really good theft prevention, it would be smarter to hide the tag or else thieves can easily remove it.So, a globally unique ID sewn into your clothing; readable wherever you go with the proper equipment. What's not to like? It means institutions that choose to can automatically and cheaply start assembling a history of which RFID tags go where, and when. Still not scared? Next step: when the cops come to pick you up as a "material witness" they can easily scan your clothing and compare it to the RFID histories. Is everyone going to feel just as free to worship unpopular religions and excercise their legal right to dissent against the powers-that-be if such technology becomes widespread?
Now do you start to see a chilling effect? Part of the danger comes from the globally unique ID; the rest comes from the ease of assembling RFID time&place databases. It could be the thin edge of the wedge of a major loss of privacy.
In the case of the Bennetton tags, there wasn't even any additional convenience for the customer; just a straightforward loss of privacy ("wow, she's back for the 3rd day, still wearing the same jeans!"). So I think that died because they couldn't come up with any "convenient" excuse for tagging your clothes.
My claim is that even in other cases, like FastLane style auto toll collection, there's no technical or engineering reason you have to give up privacy for the convenience. Instead, the designers and/or operators of the systems want the information, so they provide a benefit in order to justify collecting the information. In the case of auto toll collection, as pointed out in here, your toll debit card could be purchased anonymously. This has all the convenience and none of the privacy intrusion of existing systems.
But what's the big deal about privacy anyway? My claim is that when times are good, privacy doesn't matter. But when times are bad, it's too late! Innocent databases can be misused in terrible ways. When the Nazis conquered cities, they would use library borrowing records to find Jewish people. How long until the next J. Edgar Hoover or Joe McCarthy comes along and abuses his position of power? (Yeah, I know, some would say Ashcroft is already worse; I don't want to start that argument). My point is that it has happened here, and likely will again. The potential unforseen future misuse of databases is what makes me a privacy advocate.
So, good riddance to Bennetton's RFID tags, and let's get rid of the false dichotomy that's used to insinuate similar privacy invasions!
While I have your attention, I'm gonna make a tiny little rant about gnome, which I generally like. In gnome-1.4, gnome-terminal takes arguments like --foreground=lightblue --background=black. This annoyed me when I first encountered it because it breaks the standard color choice arguments that work in so many X11 appsl for example: xterm -fg lightblue -bg black.
But now gnome 2 breaks the old 1.4 convention! As far as I can tell, the only way to choose your colors is to create a bunch of profiles, and then use --window-with-profile. This business of manually creating profiles is doubly annoying!
The reason it matters to me is that I admin several boxes, and I use different color codes for terminals and editors on the different boxes. I have to keep on re-creating my admin scheme with each new iteration of gnome. Why keep changing it?
OK, rant over; thanks for bearing with me.