Actually, they've been testing prototypes for years now, some of them on real roads with traffic. I don't know when the law was created or why, but it may have been in response to an inquiry to enable testing, or just for purposes of Hollywood filming where a stunt driver could not be used.
IMO this is exactly why noscripts is as silly as Norton or almost any other addon security tool. Its like breaking your toy so the bully doesn't play with it. Its your browser's job to make your browsing safe. And yours of course. No, it is the site's responsibility to use the NOSCRIPT tag to provide alternative content when the script does not run for whatever reason.
So many sites so in love with Web 2.0 forgetting basic HTML principles like graceful degradation. Or at very least, <noscript><p>You need to enable scripts from gawker.com to view the images accompanying this story.</p></noscript> for the totally lazy but not quite totally inept.
Seems only DoubleClick even bothers to use the NOSCRIPT tag, just to ensure that they get their ad impression even if their script doesn't run.
Assuming this costs them money... let's just ruin the ability of everyone else to get some obscure domain name from the registrar of their choice. Who cares if the assumption is correct or not? Let's help rig the system for Network Solutions! Run every pair of words in the dictionary through it so everyone wanting a two-word domain name will have to buy it from Network Solutions!
Oh, and give special emphasis on domains people could register to set up websites critical of Network Solutions itself, so NetSol will be in a position to deny their ability to register them!
"A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky, dangerous animals and you know it." -- Agent Kay, Men In Black
"Dad, you're giving in to mob mentality!" "No I'm not, I'm hopping on the bandwagon! Now come on, son, get with the winning team!" -- Bart and Homer, The Simpsons "Krusty Gets Busted"
It's a shame someone will mod this as flamebait instead of recognizing it as a voice of reason.
It's basic English comprehension folks. You're confusing a press release's lawyerese with English.
You need to learn to recognize the weasel words that allow the release to be read in a way that neither confirms nor denies anything, but makes it sound like they are saying something substantive.
Those HD-DVD movies are going to be useless now unless you either keep your HD-DVD player just for the 20 movies you have on HD-DVD or unless you get a dual format player. Or rip them.
Come on, if your site needs to be able to run scripts from:
2mdn.net
digg.com
doubleclick.net
gawker.com
gizmodo.com
googlesyndication.com
gridskipper.com
quantserve.com
sitemeter.com
just to convey a one-paragraph story with pictures, there's something seriously wrong with your site design, your privacy practices, and the lack of respect you have for the security of your readers. Sorry, Gizmodo, but your content is not compelling enough for me to drop my shields for all your friends. We are not one big happy fleet.
Remember back in the day when we were told that computers would never be able to learn how to understand human speech because it's too complicated? The arguments were compelling but now we've got voice recognition working over crappy telephone connections and dictation software is getting better all the time. "Dear Aunt, so let's set double the killer delete select all"
I can't remember if it was Plato or Aristotle who said it, but one of the two said that the people who want to be rulers are more often than not just in it for their own glory, not to advance the civilization, and are generally the last people you'd want in power. He said that the most qualified people should be forced into positions of power, even if they don't want the position. That may as well be, but I find Douglas Adams' wording on the manner far more entertaining. Part one:
Zaphod Beeblebrox's full title was President of the Imperial Galactic Government. The term Imperial is kept, though it is now an anachronism. The hereditary Emperor is now nearly dead, and has been for many centuries. This is because in his last dying moments he was- much to his Imperial irritation- locked in a perpetual stasis field.
All his heirs are now, of course, long dead and the upshot of all this is that without any drastic upheaval political power has simply and effectively moved a rung or two down the ladder, and is now seemed to be vested in an elected governmental Assembly, headed by a President elected by that Assembly. In fact, it vests in no such place - that would be too easy.
The President's job- and if someone sufficiently vain and stupid is picked he won't realize this- is not to wield power, but to draw attention away from it. Zaphod Beeblebrox, the only man in history to have made Presidential telecasts from the bath, from Eccentrica Gallumbits bedroom, from the maximum-security wing of the Betelgeuse State Prison, or from where ever else he happened to be at the time, was supremely good at this job. and part two:
The major problem... one of the major problems, for there are several... one of the many major problems with governing people is that of whom you get to do it. Or, rather, of who manages to get people to let them do it to them.
To summarize: it is a well-known and much lamented fact that those people who most want to rule people are, ipso facto, those least suited to do it.
To summarize the summary: anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should, on no account, be allowed to do the job.
To summarize the summary of the summary: people are a problem.
And so this is the situation we find: a succession of Galactic Presidents who so much enjoy the fun and palaver of being in power that they never really notice that they're not.
And somewhere in the shadows behind them, who? Who can possibly rule if no one who wants to, can be allowed to? Followed by, of course, his answer: the man who "tr[ies] not to" rule the Universe, a quite philosophical gentleman himself.
They don't do a per session check or even a periodic check. It appears they continually check, and I must have a loose connection between TIVO-Amp-TV so I get a black screen with warning message IN THE MIDDLE OF WATCHING STUFF. and it makes me angry. I touch the cords and restart the amp and it goes away. Sometimes you just power the amp and it goes away. I used to get that all the time on my TiVo Series3 HD, telling me the HDMI connection could not display the video I was sending it. Either something changed in this area or the software of the TiVo was updated such that it's been months since I've encountered that problem.
I do still have problems with the image disappearing for a second, then coming back with a click. Worst times are when there is analog(!) noise in the digital image, even when the TiVo is paused, like someone running a blender. Most problems occur when using the TiVo, though that's only to say I use the TiVo more than any of the other four devices (XBOX 360, PS3, or upconverting Sony 400-disc DVD changer).
I pass the signal through a 4-port HDMI switch before going to the HDTV. Next time I have trouble I'm going to bypass it entirely.
I remember PCI "plugfests" at the PCI SIG meetings, where vendors of PCI products would go from room to room with PC vendors and test their products for compatibility.
This was a great way to check a far greater number of devices together than otherwise would be possible.
It was also a great way to get contacts at companies that you might not connect with any other way. That sounds kinky.
Even if you just look at what has the capability of carrying HD quality signals, it's still a long list. They can broadcast it wirelessly (as long as you have a broadcaster's license; any chance low-power in-home transmitters will be legal?), they can put in on RF cabling (crazy number of channels on one cable), component video, VGA, Firewire 400, DVI, HDMI, UDI, and DisplayPort, with the last five offering from optional to mandatory encryption. The last three only get us more signals bundled into a single cable, probably just as encrypted. The next one will probably throw in use as an AM/FM antenna and carrying encrypted XM Radio signals from your roof antenna/dish. And still some formats seem to demand separate audio paths in order to frustrate attempts to capture it (SACD using 6 analog RCA cables and prohibiting Toslink or any outside-the-box access to the digital stream).
Sure, RF (wired or cabled) and Firewire carry compressed data streams(*) while the rest carry uncompressed video, and it isn't feasible yet to real-time encode a 1920x1200 display signal into an MPEG-2 transport stream with enough quality to satisfy everyone (though we seem more tolerant of audio infidelity, re MP3). But can't they just let it rest for awhile and let the market decide rather than putting out options rivaling in number the candidates of a California ballot?
IMO, it's too many changes too fast for reasons not driven by consumer demand.
(*) Given enough channels though, you can put out multiple uncompressed SD video signals and combine them to create an HD image. Redundant signals could be used for error correction. If you can get tuners small enough.
You don't want a 30" in portrait mode. Well, probably not with the base at desktop height, but maybe with mid-line at eye level and base slightly below desktop height, it might be useful. Far enough away on a shallow desk won't obscure the view.
But then I'd only have it that way for coding and browsing. For video work, 1600 wide isn't enough for 1920x1080 HD video. That's one of the reasons why I wish my Matrox TripleHead2Go box (older VGA edition) allowed its three 1280x1024 displays to be stitched together for 3072x1280. Even for gaming, there can be such a thing as too much peripheral vision.
Besides, it already has 1600 vertical resolution. That's sufficient for anything I've ever needed to do. Well, sometimes you have to deal with code written by someone who doesn't know how to break a function into smaller logical segments.
What would be nice is to have the 30" landscape and then two portrait 1200x1600 displays at the same dpi flanking it, bezels removed. Saves a bit on the display costs on a multi-head setup going with the lower-res displays. Too bad I can't find any cables to split a dual-link DVI port to drive two separate displays (I guess it's a problem of two displays having to share the same clock signal), let alone a single card that would drive it that way.
If you REALLY need it in portrait mode, get an ANSI mount for it that is fully articulating. ANSI? I thought VESA was the standard for such things.
Do we really need another video interface? How many does that make now?
There's wireless NTSC, PAL, SECAM, and ATSC. There's RF cabling to carry those as well. There's RCA-composite and S-Video. (Let's not get into all the audio options.) You can get composite and audio on a 4-conductor headphone jack too on portable DVD players and some SlingBoxes. IIRC Betamax had a monaural 3-conductor version too. There's SCART. There's component video. There's VGA as well as 5-BNC (R,G,B,H,V). There's ADC for Apple users, and that DB15F connector Apple used to use. There's Sun's 13W3. There's DVI-A (also carries VGA), DVI-D (digital-only), and Dual-link DVI. There's HDMI, latest version being 1.3b (follows 1.3 and 1.3a, not "beta"). There's Firewire 400, and even USB 2.0 gets used for video. Multiple sizes too. There's Unified Display Interface (UDI). And now there's DisplayPort.
Did I miss anything? I'm sure there's lots more in just the streaming video area.
Makes HD DVD vs. Blu-ray seem like nothing, doesn't it?
Oh yeah, there's the TVs with players built into them too, so you could add VHS and DVD to the list so far. (UMD is opening that window too far.)
How about 8 Grand? 200 dpi, 4x the resolution of HD, in only 22.2". Now that's what I want to edit HD video on! Two source clips up at full HD res, a third for the mix, and still lots of room for the timeline, palette, and asset list. Throw in a 120 Hz refresh rate for working in both 24 and 30 fps and it's golden!
plus the widescreen layout is fairly useless for any programming/web&graphics design work. Isn't that what portrait mode is for?
Or just don't run your ocde editor maximized all the time. In my work environment with a 1600x1200 display I run xemacs in three 80-column buffers for referencing multiple source files at once. With a QXVGA display at 1600x2560 portrait, that's a lot of code I could see all at once! Get me that in a 25" display (120 dpi instead of 30" at 100 dpi) and I'd be very happy code monkey!
Actually it is quite clear. The resolution is also explicitly supported, so it isn't a matter of my overdriving the display (as I had done with the Apple 21" Studio Display VGA CRT it replaced). And with better dots per inch than this 30" (122dpi vs 100dpi), deeper black level, and faster refresh rate, at less than a quarter of the price. (I have a 47" LCD HD Monitor for entertainment to compare against.)
Still, I really like the interface choices on this Dell display. I've been meaning to replace the small LCD I'm using as a secondary display with a Dual-link DVI display, and the multiple inputs and Picture By Picture mode will simplify my workspace editing digital video as well as negate the need for a dual-link DVI KVM.
Why not use the 47" display? Because it's all the way across the room behind me.
I'd really like to know how much this thing is gonna cost. It's like trying to solve a cryptex looking for a price tag anywhere. Last page says MSRP US$1999.
I was really into Car Wars - and spent weeks building a campaign based around gurps with maps of our home town, school and stuff like that. It was a lot of fun.
It would be really cool to have software to do something like that. Import maps, stats, scenarios, etc. Then be able to put it all together. Yeah, and around the turn of the century it could have been called Instant Expulsion Toolkit. After 2001, it would be called Terrorist Attack Planner. Damn current events always spoiling opportunities for kids to have good clean fun.
Because the business owner's right to protect his or her property trumps your 'right' to do-whatever-the-hell-you-want on his or her property. Protect the property? What, is my camera going to steal their inventory's souls?
And you're taking me all wrong. I'm just stating what the reality is: you can get thrown out for life from your favorite business where you've been a perfect and generous customer if you do any one thing they don't like, including bringing in a camera.
I can't speak for Wisconsin, but in many states you must be a party to the conversation or have the consent of at least one party to the conversation to record it. On the face, if they snuck the recorder in the child's pack, they didn't even have consent of the child. The child may be a not-legally consenting but willing participant in the abuse and protective of the abuser (often the situation in a statutory rape case). A fuller look at the facts on appeal and you could have the consent requirement negated by minor-guardian relationship or consent given by the child after the fact.
When a business owner levels charges against you for some infraction against his business, when it becomes a matter of your word against his, and when he employs his own surveillance against you, why shouldn't you have your own record for when it gets brought up before the courts later?
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, they've been testing prototypes for years now, some of them on real roads with traffic. I don't know when the law was created or why, but it may have been in response to an inquiry to enable testing, or just for purposes of Hollywood filming where a stunt driver could not be used.
In California, state law prohibits driverless cars from exceeding 60 MPH.
And you probably thought that was a weird law. California's just ahead of the curve.
So many sites so in love with Web 2.0 forgetting basic HTML principles like graceful degradation. Or at very least, <noscript><p>You need to enable scripts from gawker.com to view the images accompanying this story.</p></noscript> for the totally lazy but not quite totally inept.
Seems only DoubleClick even bothers to use the NOSCRIPT tag, just to ensure that they get their ad impression even if their script doesn't run.
Oh, and give special emphasis on domains people could register to set up websites critical of Network Solutions itself, so NetSol will be in a position to deny their ability to register them!
"A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky, dangerous animals and you know it."
-- Agent Kay, Men In Black
"Dad, you're giving in to mob mentality!"
"No I'm not, I'm hopping on the bandwagon! Now come on, son, get with the winning team!"
-- Bart and Homer, The Simpsons "Krusty Gets Busted"
It's a shame someone will mod this as flamebait instead of recognizing it as a voice of reason.
You need to learn to recognize the weasel words that allow the release to be read in a way that neither confirms nor denies anything, but makes it sound like they are saying something substantive.
- 2mdn.net
- digg.com
- doubleclick.net
- gawker.com
- gizmodo.com
- googlesyndication.com
- gridskipper.com
- quantserve.com
- sitemeter.com
just to convey a one-paragraph story with pictures, there's something seriously wrong with your site design, your privacy practices, and the lack of respect you have for the security of your readers. Sorry, Gizmodo, but your content is not compelling enough for me to drop my shields for all your friends. We are not one big happy fleet.Recognition != Understanding
All his heirs are now, of course, long dead and the upshot of all this is that without any drastic upheaval political power has simply and effectively moved a rung or two down the ladder, and is now seemed to be vested in an elected governmental Assembly, headed by a President elected by that Assembly. In fact, it vests in no such place - that would be too easy.
The President's job- and if someone sufficiently vain and stupid is picked he won't realize this- is not to wield power, but to draw attention away from it. Zaphod Beeblebrox, the only man in history to have made Presidential telecasts from the bath, from Eccentrica Gallumbits bedroom, from the maximum-security wing of the Betelgeuse State Prison, or from where ever else he happened to be at the time, was supremely good at this job. and part two: The major problem... one of the major problems, for there are several... one of the many major problems with governing people is that of whom you get to do it. Or, rather, of who manages to get people to let them do it to them.
To summarize: it is a well-known and much lamented fact that those people who most want to rule people are, ipso facto, those least suited to do it.
To summarize the summary: anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should, on no account, be allowed to do the job.
To summarize the summary of the summary: people are a problem.
And so this is the situation we find: a succession of Galactic Presidents who so much enjoy the fun and palaver of being in power that they never really notice that they're not.
And somewhere in the shadows behind them, who? Who can possibly rule if no one who wants to, can be allowed to? Followed by, of course, his answer: the man who "tr[ies] not to" rule the Universe, a quite philosophical gentleman himself.
I do still have problems with the image disappearing for a second, then coming back with a click. Worst times are when there is analog(!) noise in the digital image, even when the TiVo is paused, like someone running a blender. Most problems occur when using the TiVo, though that's only to say I use the TiVo more than any of the other four devices (XBOX 360, PS3, or upconverting Sony 400-disc DVD changer).
I pass the signal through a 4-port HDMI switch before going to the HDTV. Next time I have trouble I'm going to bypass it entirely.
This was a great way to check a far greater number of devices together than otherwise would be possible.
It was also a great way to get contacts at companies that you might not connect with any other way. That sounds kinky.
Even if you just look at what has the capability of carrying HD quality signals, it's still a long list. They can broadcast it wirelessly (as long as you have a broadcaster's license; any chance low-power in-home transmitters will be legal?), they can put in on RF cabling (crazy number of channels on one cable), component video, VGA, Firewire 400, DVI, HDMI, UDI, and DisplayPort, with the last five offering from optional to mandatory encryption. The last three only get us more signals bundled into a single cable, probably just as encrypted. The next one will probably throw in use as an AM/FM antenna and carrying encrypted XM Radio signals from your roof antenna/dish. And still some formats seem to demand separate audio paths in order to frustrate attempts to capture it (SACD using 6 analog RCA cables and prohibiting Toslink or any outside-the-box access to the digital stream).
Sure, RF (wired or cabled) and Firewire carry compressed data streams(*) while the rest carry uncompressed video, and it isn't feasible yet to real-time encode a 1920x1200 display signal into an MPEG-2 transport stream with enough quality to satisfy everyone (though we seem more tolerant of audio infidelity, re MP3). But can't they just let it rest for awhile and let the market decide rather than putting out options rivaling in number the candidates of a California ballot?
IMO, it's too many changes too fast for reasons not driven by consumer demand.
(*) Given enough channels though, you can put out multiple uncompressed SD video signals and combine them to create an HD image. Redundant signals could be used for error correction. If you can get tuners small enough.
But then I'd only have it that way for coding and browsing. For video work, 1600 wide isn't enough for 1920x1080 HD video. That's one of the reasons why I wish my Matrox TripleHead2Go box (older VGA edition) allowed its three 1280x1024 displays to be stitched together for 3072x1280. Even for gaming, there can be such a thing as too much peripheral vision. Besides, it already has 1600 vertical resolution. That's sufficient for anything I've ever needed to do. Well, sometimes you have to deal with code written by someone who doesn't know how to break a function into smaller logical segments.
What would be nice is to have the 30" landscape and then two portrait 1200x1600 displays at the same dpi flanking it, bezels removed. Saves a bit on the display costs on a multi-head setup going with the lower-res displays. Too bad I can't find any cables to split a dual-link DVI port to drive two separate displays (I guess it's a problem of two displays having to share the same clock signal), let alone a single card that would drive it that way. If you REALLY need it in portrait mode, get an ANSI mount for it that is fully articulating. ANSI? I thought VESA was the standard for such things.
Do we really need another video interface? How many does that make now?
There's wireless NTSC, PAL, SECAM, and ATSC.
There's RF cabling to carry those as well.
There's RCA-composite and S-Video. (Let's not get into all the audio options.)
You can get composite and audio on a 4-conductor headphone jack too on portable DVD players and some SlingBoxes.
IIRC Betamax had a monaural 3-conductor version too.
There's SCART.
There's component video.
There's VGA as well as 5-BNC (R,G,B,H,V).
There's ADC for Apple users, and that DB15F connector Apple used to use.
There's Sun's 13W3.
There's DVI-A (also carries VGA), DVI-D (digital-only), and Dual-link DVI.
There's HDMI, latest version being 1.3b (follows 1.3 and 1.3a, not "beta").
There's Firewire 400, and even USB 2.0 gets used for video. Multiple sizes too.
There's Unified Display Interface (UDI).
And now there's DisplayPort.
Did I miss anything? I'm sure there's lots more in just the streaming video area.
Makes HD DVD vs. Blu-ray seem like nothing, doesn't it?
Oh yeah, there's the TVs with players built into them too, so you could add VHS and DVD to the list so far. (UMD is opening that window too far.)
How about 8 Grand? 200 dpi, 4x the resolution of HD, in only 22.2". Now that's what I want to edit HD video on! Two source clips up at full HD res, a third for the mix, and still lots of room for the timeline, palette, and asset list. Throw in a 120 Hz refresh rate for working in both 24 and 30 fps and it's golden!
Or just don't run your ocde editor maximized all the time. In my work environment with a 1600x1200 display I run xemacs in three 80-column buffers for referencing multiple source files at once. With a QXVGA display at 1600x2560 portrait, that's a lot of code I could see all at once! Get me that in a 25" display (120 dpi instead of 30" at 100 dpi) and I'd be very happy code monkey!
Really, 100 dpi they call UltraSharp?
Actually it is quite clear. The resolution is also explicitly supported, so it isn't a matter of my overdriving the display (as I had done with the Apple 21" Studio Display VGA CRT it replaced). And with better dots per inch than this 30" (122dpi vs 100dpi), deeper black level, and faster refresh rate, at less than a quarter of the price. (I have a 47" LCD HD Monitor for entertainment to compare against.)
Still, I really like the interface choices on this Dell display. I've been meaning to replace the small LCD I'm using as a secondary display with a Dual-link DVI display, and the multiple inputs and Picture By Picture mode will simplify my workspace editing digital video as well as negate the need for a dual-link DVI KVM.
Why not use the 47" display? Because it's all the way across the room behind me.
HDTVs tend not to include Dual-link DVI and its resolution of 2560x1600.
I already run my 21" VGA-connected 4:3 CRT at 2048x1536 (the limit supported by my KVM switch).
What this Dell display is missing is a stand that supports easy switching to portrait mode.
It would be really cool to have software to do something like that. Import maps, stats, scenarios, etc. Then be able to put it all together. Yeah, and around the turn of the century it could have been called Instant Expulsion Toolkit. After 2001, it would be called Terrorist Attack Planner. Damn current events always spoiling opportunities for kids to have good clean fun.
And you're taking me all wrong. I'm just stating what the reality is: you can get thrown out for life from your favorite business where you've been a perfect and generous customer if you do any one thing they don't like, including bringing in a camera.
So it's best to keep your cameras hidden.
I can't speak for Wisconsin, but in many states you must be a party to the conversation or have the consent of at least one party to the conversation to record it. On the face, if they snuck the recorder in the child's pack, they didn't even have consent of the child. The child may be a not-legally consenting but willing participant in the abuse and protective of the abuser (often the situation in a statutory rape case). A fuller look at the facts on appeal and you could have the consent requirement negated by minor-guardian relationship or consent given by the child after the fact.
IANAL.
When a business owner levels charges against you for some infraction against his business, when it becomes a matter of your word against his, and when he employs his own surveillance against you, why shouldn't you have your own record for when it gets brought up before the courts later?