I didnt have to. I checked the device manager and found no bluetooth in that. Either Acer left the driver out (highly unlikely) or it's just not in there.
Later on, a friend from the uni bought that very acer I looked at. He couldnt use his phone with the laptop because it didnt have the bluetooth module in it.
---I understand what you're saying, and you haven't fallen into the trap of trying to generalize your case for everyone. But in _my_ specific case, I want to play Netflix content on Linux - stuff I've already paid for as part of my subscription and isn't time limited (at least, not right now).
Too true. Netflix is understood that one has access whilst purchasing the service(keeping true to the idea of rental). That is a different category than what I am talking about. And unfortunately, it does not play in Linux.
---Until very recently, it was possible to strip DRM from such files under Windows (and then indeed play with mplayer on Linux), but recent changes mean this is no longer true (at least until a better hack exists)
I dont keep up with what is un-drm-able and what isnt. However, I found to be most distasteful is how Microsoft themselves cannot keep up a long term license server for their older products. Instead of keeping the old license servers up, or patching so the content is no longer DRM'ed, they recommended that people crack the files because they are going 'unsupported'. I see that as very ethically wrong, and probably fraudulent.
I can only ask: when are the current license servers going down and bring down all zune content with them?
I know about the scripting offerings that is available for Windows. All of them have their major fallouts for being on the Windows platform.
These problems go to Windows to its core. How do we change the Registry in text format so that we can guarantee that we do not corrupt it? I'm sure there's a commandline regedit somewhere, but I'd like to edit it as flat files ala/etc.
I'd like to use a Microsoft system that does not require graphical support. Where's a rich commandline for those that need no graphics (samba server, calendar/mail server..)?
I'd like a full update of nearly every program at once. Debian, RH, and many others who are much smaller than Microsoft can manage to do this very well. Considering MS's clout, why cant they make a unified updater like RPM or Dpackage? They could already do this with all the "free license" projects, so the only group left is COTS. I'd also like the ability to back up these updates on a local server like SAS (or ANY distro with Linux) but have the same cost as Linux.
Windows has file locking. Linux doesnt. I can save a MP3 in linux and play it at the same time. I can also delete it WHILE playing and nothing bad happens (until I hit the beginning again). Windows has the annoying "feature" 'its currently in use. do something different'.
There's tons of things here and there that will lessen the usability of ported BASH and python on Windows. WSH is also a answer, but still does not enough compared to bash and linux. I cant find many things that Windows is better at than Linux.
I buy only what's on sale. I dont buy what's licenses for X amount of time.
Therefore, I do not consider DRM stuff to even be on the market. After what Google, Microsoft and such have already proved, companies that hock such setups are guaranteed 100% unreliability rate. Are they planning to keep the license servers up for 50+ years? I doubt it.
There's a of of simple and pro stuff that isnt done.
I believe they made a GIMP with 32bpp support, but something as simple as drawing simple shapes is needlessly complex. Photoshop has simple tools for simple shapes.
But it IS getting there. And if GIMP does work for you, then use it!
Dont get me wrong. I use Windows and Linux and know about cross compatibility of each and ported programs.
VLC's nice for handling horribly mangled video and audio frames, but mplayer is super speedy. They both have their pluses and minuses.
In Linux, I can process VLC on one machine and port the visualization to another machine (we have 1Gbps wired network here at home). I can also set up rendering jobs when the machine comes live (or from a DVB card ^_^ ).
From my knowledge, scripting Windows to do those sort of operations would be hard, if not nigh impossible. One would need a full scripting language, like bash, to do such. It would require Interix (?) to get that kind of compatibility, not to mentrion being set back by a 100$ or so... And I get that already from Linux.
What's killer for me is that mplayer is on there in full working order.
I've found that I can throw ANY format I want at it, and it can always create OGM's, MPG's, or AVI's. No if's and's or but's from it. It just works.
Since there's multiple video decoders and renderers, I can play everything even if some video (like... video from the bad div3 hacked up codec) doesnt play on one player.
In windows world, if it crashes on 1 program, it will crash on another (since they almost all use the windows codec system).
I was looking for a laptop about a year ago (I ended up getting a Thinkpad after a nasty return process).
I went to the Circuit City cause I had a cc from them and I get points and all. I started looking at the brands offered: Gateway, IBM, Sony, Toshiba, some noname brand I didnt recognize, and acer.
Gateway looked nice but wasnt feature laden for what I wanted (only had 1g ram). I saw what the current IBM's looked like, but couldnt afford it at the time.. but I wanted it. Sony: Root-kit fiasco. Hell no. Toshiba looked nice but was a little too flimsy for my taste. It felt the cowling on the lip of the base was going to pop off. Nonames: Had little lights in the laptop you could turn on and off in the bios. They were bargain basement cause they had as low as 512MB ram. Pass. HP. I got suckered in buying a dv9660us because it was sleek, seemed to run nice, and had most of the ports I needed. In the end, the nice sensor bar failed for the second time and I demanded my money back. I used this money to buy a T61 decked out;D I'm happy now along with my 8-10 hr battery life
Acer: Looked decent and clean. There were a lot of switches on the body turning on and off components via ACPI calls (like turn on and off wifi). There was one though... The bluetooth switch. It was on all the models but NONE HAD BLUETOOTH. How shoddy was that? The switch just sort-of glided back and forth like when a mechanical microswitch fails. This thing felt cheaper than the cheapest no-namer.
If their new line is under 300, I'd consider it. Because thats I can afford to lose.
Then the key question to the 'fuzziests' out there is: How much mechanical material is allowed to interface with human material without losing some sort of "soul quantity"?
Is it 1 device (1 nanobot)? 10? 10000? A whole organ? Would one consider Phineas Gage to be a sub-human due to his self-lobotomy?
Conjecture: Computers cannot obtain consciousness because they follow Aristotelian logic.
A neuron is a biological unit in the nervous system. The brain is made up of roughly 100 billion neurons. A neuron operates on chemical impulses coming from other neurons. By experiment, we will be able to determine how 1 neuron works.
After nanotech furthers, we will be able to make a mechanical neuron. If we were to slowly substitute neurons for mech-neurons in the same pace the brain cleans up dying cells, would not this be the same person?
We can see that basic logic in gigantic nets can and will create consciousness.
---Kurzweil is one seriously messed up scientist. This guy extended the Moore's law (look up Kurzweil's law of accelerating returns) to predict that civilization as we know it will cease to exist and will effectively become the civilization of super/trans-humans or artificial intelligent beings by 2020.
A scientists job is not to criticize the results when one doesnt "like" them. Instead, one interprets results, and this is what he did. The math works, and he stands behind that result.
---Never mind all the scientific or technical obstacles that even non-scientific person could think of, let alone once we get into philosophical issues (for things we don't even have words to talk about yet).
Let me pose this question to you then: What happens when capitalism and high technology blend? The people who matter want this tech he describes: genetic tailoring, nanotech, and robotics.
Gene manipulation and immunoresets are possible, but for the elite few who can afford it. Genetic diseases are rid of by tailoring non-disease marrow and injecting them. I remember when the Human Genome project started... almost 15 years to complete. SARS took 29 days.
We already use nanotech in our everyday life. Exactly how do they rate CPUs and GPUs? That's right, by the process they used to create it. Nanotech doesnt mean nano-robots, but will eventually. Nanotech means we can manipulate 1/10^6 m. We also see nanotech by the labs on a chip used in biowarfare detection the military is currently using. It's there, hiding in plain sight.
Robotics is the hardest now, but that's only because we dont have a powerful enough vision system processor. Once we have that, things will get scary crazy (as in Story of Manna crazy). And along with "robotics" we have plenty of software to run some interesting things right now. Some guy in his garage built a fully automatic heart-targetting gun turret ala Team Fortress Classic using homemade gear and COTS parts. 2 webcams with parallax was all he needed for basic motion/depth detection.
---Yet there is still a very simple reason why the prediction will not happen. Does he know how long it takes for FDA to approve a brain implant of the kind he is suggesting (even if we had one)?
Which is why the USA will stagnate. We need less of these BS laws and allowances for scientists to experiment with accepting subjects who qualify as sane. We could have a working bionic plugin eye if it wasnt for the stranglehold the FDA and AMA hold on the USA. I'd say the FDA needs to be neutered to a "recommend/do not recommend" if exist at all.
---I've said it before and I will say it again. This is nothing more than a religion posing as pseudo-science from a guy who takes 200 anti-aging pills hoping to reach immortality though technology.
My parents started taking supplements after hearing from news broadcasts and Dr Oz on Oprah. I chose not to, while observing what happens. One such drug is resveratrol, along with l-lysene and massive dosages of vitamin C(4g a day). My mom took glucosamine and chrondroitin sulfate for her back after a friend (who is a veterinarian) recommended it to her. Animal clinics use that complex specifically for severe arthritis for animals. No company can make money for paying the required fees for the FDA and stays a "supplement". My mom with glucosamine/chrondroitin healed her back with it to 100%.
Well, back to he new drugs.. My mom and dad started the cocktail. My dad's bald on the top, or was. One of those drugs is actually regrowing his hair. We're not sure if it's C, resveratrol, or l-lysene, but it's something. Rogane (?) never worked. My mom's knees also cracked and stuff in the joints. Now she can feel her knees healing.
They took Linus Pauling's recommendation on massive C dosages and seem to work as he claimed. Considering he won 2 Nobels in 2 fields, we respect him, even if the medical society does not. I have thought about following this same regimen and recording my progress, as it does seem to work for them (placebo is not strong enough to grow hair that hasnt in 20+ years).
---But one thing is for sure, Kurzweil will die just like every other "prophet" before him.
I really fail to grasp why corporations (NOT individuals) fail to understand the ramifications of such EULAs and MS software contracts.
Negotiating a seat deal with MS leads to a very nasty possible outcome: invasion by Business Software Alliance. If you refuse, you invalidate all your licenses... and they always find something "illegal". It's one thing to switch because of some perceived wrong or being high and mighty, but a corporation is a corporation. When it comes to software, they literally open themselves up for heavy liability if they accept MS and other COTS software.
GPL means something else too: if you dont create software, you can ignore any "bad side effects". Only violators who refuse to share source are gone after. Usage is truly free of legal ramifications.
You're one of the reasons I still read Slashdot. You maintain a polite, accurate, and to the point commentary. If I was the article writer, I'd understand the issue more.
Or better yet, what would happen if some new device could record without observing?
---Quantum cryptography isn't a cipher. It's a method of transmitting data, which does one specific thing, which is guarantee that you'll be able to tell if people have attempted to eavesdrop. It's not a complete cryptosystem; it's not meant to be. It's meant to be just one component of cryptosystems, and in doing what it does, it's provably secure in the sense that secure is being used here.
Of course not. quantum crypto solves the problem with OTP's: secure transmission of the OTP lookup sheet itself. I forget the bit rate of the machine, but it's something damned slow (100 bits/s?). The ultimate problem with any crypto system is still the people though. Too bad it doesnt fix that ^_^
---(Incidentally, mathematical proofs aren't like scientific proofs; it *is* possible to prove with absolute certainty in mathematics.)
Also, unfortunately, QC math isnt a math proof. It's a proof on physics that attempts to estimate the real math of our universe. Until we know the "real" math, there will be holes in our knowledge, and therefore unprovable. It's probably pretty accurate though, but is it accurate to trust?
---How is your mathemetician going to distribute his one time pad?
A one time pad guarantees perfect secrecy. A QC channel allows secrecy as any "listening" devices become in part with the system, thereby allowing detection.
I do think this is a bit excessive by stating.. Data is always time-dependent. Therefore, we only need protect data for X amount of years.
What combination of encryption technologies can we use to make the data physically hard to crack? We need a multi-tiered encryption setup that uses multiple algorithms and multiple layers. Assuming mathematical proof of said encryption and no holes in implementation, we can calculate CPU years in brute-forcing each layer. Also, assuming that MIPS/s is increasing exponentially, we can calculate a "cracked by" date, and wrap said data in the date we need.
Having "perfect" data integrity and "perfect" communication seems... not right. It's just a gut feeling.
American Scientist ran an article about Light traps for light processing, Tip-of-the-Tongue processing states of memory and speech creation, Parkinson's Disease discussion, and a Moon surface discussion.
And Scientific American (spit) runs yet another optical illusion article. I knew there was a reason why we dumped them and went AmSci.
I was thinking on the lines of identifying the security detail by performing said actions, but I'd rather make a joke of them than hurt them.
Like after said Target Prayer is surrounded, have 20-30 people say "If this were not a drill, we have identified all security personnel. Fortunately, we are Jokester Group $name."
Better safety precautions when on a 300 person missile is usually a better thing. Crap like facecrime is just criminally stupid because it really tells no information.
Find what makes it tick and have as many people do "facecrime" or whatever gobbledygook they call it. 30 people doing something weird (not illegal and not evil) would do some funny things on an airplane.
I'm thinking of something like that Improv group in New York City and their shenanigans.
I wonder if Christians think Wicca is obscene? I wonder if MADD thinks alcohol recipe website are obscene? I wonder if Luddites think technology is obscene?
Really. I dont wonder at all. It's pretty damn evident that certain groups think other groups are obscene. Just as beauty, obscenity is in the eye of the beholder too. Declaring something an obscenity is just a way that group can actively pretend it doesnt exist: censorship.
---Did you read the rest of his comments? He actually believes that artists don't need to work for money. He believes that the awesome power of music will be sufficient to put food on the table, plus finance their instruments, recording devices, and distribution methods. Hell, they probably won't even be able to afford internet access without a decent job. This guy is living in a fantasy world, one carefully constructed to justify and validate his opinions. It seems, like I said, that he has defined his taste in music to be in line with his political view of copyright, and also he has defined everyone else's taste in music to be in line with that. Hence he feels no remorse in peddling these crazy fantasies as fact. It's just a sad indicator of the times really.
True, some of it IS pie-in-the-sky, but following the pure capitalistic style also destroys arts! Why? I've seen this same behavior in each "artist colony" town I lived in, and they all die the same way.
First, groups of artists move out of a big city to the countryside where prices are cheaper for property and they can get peace and quiet for their work. Usually they will inhabit a small town not connected by any interstate or major thoroughfare. After a while, more people bring more artists hearing of a colony. Words of them follow and we see the start of "trinkets dealers" who sell 'handcrafted' goods from china at the truly handcrafted price. Time goes on and we see more artisans being replaced by junk dealers, while the prices of land skyrocket due to the new influx of people who sell prefab goods. The eventual downfall is when there is 1 or 2 artists left, in their retiring age. Through this time, about 30-50 years passed.
I once lived near a town in its last stages (Metamora, IN), and now I live in a town 20 years in. The recent recession has killed off many a junk dealers, with detriment to the people. One rich person has purchased 1/3~1/2 the land in Nashville (IN) and now sits on it all charging excessive rent. The net effect is that artists literally cant even live in Nashville.
Honestly, artists need money to survive. However, one does not become an artist to make scads of money. There's some happy medium between hippie-happy and money-grabber.
---How does it exit copyright?
That's simple. The GPL was created to convert the US system of copyright to a communistic version instead. Because he cannot nullify copyright, he had to create a license in which effectively substituted it. He rightfully realized that Communism broke down in the world due to rationing of limited goods (something that capitalism IS good at). Software can be copied for costs that approach 0, therefore communism could work.
---It shows some software developers are willing to contribute their work for free.
That's just not true. Lets look at the kernel team: is Linus working for free? Heh, no! We can go down the list and most of them are paid members of corporations that value their work. File systems are a commodity, as are web browsers, file browsers, movie players, web servers, you name it. It just happens that the transfer of money is flipped in a new way.
I would also bet that many of the vertical FLOSS apps are paid by the support people (ex. Asterisk).
---It says nothing about the quality of the software,
Those who have the skill (ourselves, or paid to inspect) can verify that for ourselves. Also, COTS has no guarantee or fitness. You act that FLOSS does.. Weird. I remember the EULAs on Sun's software that says 'we arent responsible if you use this software in a nuclear reactor'. MS and the rest of the gang dont guarantee quality either.
---and it says nothing about anything else besides software.
Can that not be said of any software? The GPL was a legal and monetary construct to combat what Stallman did not like. It just seems to work.. Or at least all 18000 packages on my Debian colo server work flawlessly.
---It also gives no hints as to the repercussions of removing the choice
Slashdot Mirror
I didnt have to. I checked the device manager and found no bluetooth in that. Either Acer left the driver out (highly unlikely) or it's just not in there.
Later on, a friend from the uni bought that very acer I looked at. He couldnt use his phone with the laptop because it didnt have the bluetooth module in it.
---I understand what you're saying, and you haven't fallen into the trap of trying to generalize your case for everyone. But in _my_ specific case, I want to play Netflix content on Linux - stuff I've already paid for as part of my subscription and isn't time limited (at least, not right now).
Too true. Netflix is understood that one has access whilst purchasing the service(keeping true to the idea of rental). That is a different category than what I am talking about. And unfortunately, it does not play in Linux.
---Until very recently, it was possible to strip DRM from such files under Windows (and then indeed play with mplayer on Linux), but recent changes mean this is no longer true (at least until a better hack exists)
I dont keep up with what is un-drm-able and what isnt. However, I found to be most distasteful is how Microsoft themselves cannot keep up a long term license server for their older products. Instead of keeping the old license servers up, or patching so the content is no longer DRM'ed, they recommended that people crack the files because they are going 'unsupported'. I see that as very ethically wrong, and probably fraudulent.
I can only ask: when are the current license servers going down and bring down all zune content with them?
I know about the scripting offerings that is available for Windows. All of them have their major fallouts for being on the Windows platform.
/etc.
These problems go to Windows to its core. How do we change the Registry in text format so that we can guarantee that we do not corrupt it? I'm sure there's a commandline regedit somewhere, but I'd like to edit it as flat files ala
I'd like to use a Microsoft system that does not require graphical support. Where's a rich commandline for those that need no graphics (samba server, calendar/mail server..)?
I'd like a full update of nearly every program at once. Debian, RH, and many others who are much smaller than Microsoft can manage to do this very well. Considering MS's clout, why cant they make a unified updater like RPM or Dpackage? They could already do this with all the "free license" projects, so the only group left is COTS. I'd also like the ability to back up these updates on a local server like SAS (or ANY distro with Linux) but have the same cost as Linux.
Windows has file locking. Linux doesnt. I can save a MP3 in linux and play it at the same time. I can also delete it WHILE playing and nothing bad happens (until I hit the beginning again). Windows has the annoying "feature" 'its currently in use. do something different'.
There's tons of things here and there that will lessen the usability of ported BASH and python on Windows. WSH is also a answer, but still does not enough compared to bash and linux. I cant find many things that Windows is better at than Linux.
I buy only what's on sale. I dont buy what's licenses for X amount of time.
Therefore, I do not consider DRM stuff to even be on the market. After what Google, Microsoft and such have already proved, companies that hock such setups are guaranteed 100% unreliability rate. Are they planning to keep the license servers up for 50+ years? I doubt it.
There's a of of simple and pro stuff that isnt done.
I believe they made a GIMP with 32bpp support, but something as simple as drawing simple shapes is needlessly complex. Photoshop has simple tools for simple shapes.
But it IS getting there. And if GIMP does work for you, then use it!
Dont get me wrong. I use Windows and Linux and know about cross compatibility of each and ported programs.
VLC's nice for handling horribly mangled video and audio frames, but mplayer is super speedy. They both have their pluses and minuses.
In Linux, I can process VLC on one machine and port the visualization to another machine (we have 1Gbps wired network here at home). I can also set up rendering jobs when the machine comes live (or from a DVB card ^_^ ).
From my knowledge, scripting Windows to do those sort of operations would be hard, if not nigh impossible. One would need a full scripting language, like bash, to do such. It would require Interix (?) to get that kind of compatibility, not to mentrion being set back by a 100$ or so... And I get that already from Linux.
What's killer for me is that mplayer is on there in full working order.
I've found that I can throw ANY format I want at it, and it can always create OGM's, MPG's, or AVI's. No if's and's or but's from it. It just works.
Since there's multiple video decoders and renderers, I can play everything even if some video (like... video from the bad div3 hacked up codec) doesnt play on one player.
In windows world, if it crashes on 1 program, it will crash on another (since they almost all use the windows codec system).
I was looking for a laptop about a year ago (I ended up getting a Thinkpad after a nasty return process).
;D I'm happy now along with my 8-10 hr battery life
I went to the Circuit City cause I had a cc from them and I get points and all. I started looking at the brands offered: Gateway, IBM, Sony, Toshiba, some noname brand I didnt recognize, and acer.
Gateway looked nice but wasnt feature laden for what I wanted (only had 1g ram).
I saw what the current IBM's looked like, but couldnt afford it at the time.. but I wanted it.
Sony: Root-kit fiasco. Hell no.
Toshiba looked nice but was a little too flimsy for my taste. It felt the cowling on the lip of the base was going to pop off.
Nonames: Had little lights in the laptop you could turn on and off in the bios. They were bargain basement cause they had as low as 512MB ram. Pass.
HP. I got suckered in buying a dv9660us because it was sleek, seemed to run nice, and had most of the ports I needed. In the end, the nice sensor bar failed for the second time and I demanded my money back. I used this money to buy a T61 decked out
Acer: Looked decent and clean. There were a lot of switches on the body turning on and off components via ACPI calls (like turn on and off wifi). There was one though... The bluetooth switch. It was on all the models but NONE HAD BLUETOOTH. How shoddy was that? The switch just sort-of glided back and forth like when a mechanical microswitch fails. This thing felt cheaper than the cheapest no-namer.
If their new line is under 300, I'd consider it. Because thats I can afford to lose.
Then the key question to the 'fuzziests' out there is: How much mechanical material is allowed to interface with human material without losing some sort of "soul quantity"?
Is it 1 device (1 nanobot)? 10? 10000? A whole organ?
Would one consider Phineas Gage to be a sub-human due to his self-lobotomy?
And it's simple to prove that false.
Conjecture: Computers cannot obtain consciousness because they follow Aristotelian logic.
A neuron is a biological unit in the nervous system.
The brain is made up of roughly 100 billion neurons.
A neuron operates on chemical impulses coming from other neurons.
By experiment, we will be able to determine how 1 neuron works.
After nanotech furthers, we will be able to make a mechanical neuron.
If we were to slowly substitute neurons for mech-neurons in the same pace the brain cleans up dying cells, would not this be the same person?
We can see that basic logic in gigantic nets can and will create consciousness.
---Kurzweil is one seriously messed up scientist. This guy extended the Moore's law (look up Kurzweil's law of accelerating returns) to predict that civilization as we know it will cease to exist and will effectively become the civilization of super/trans-humans or artificial intelligent beings by 2020.
A scientists job is not to criticize the results when one doesnt "like" them. Instead, one interprets results, and this is what he did. The math works, and he stands behind that result.
---Never mind all the scientific or technical obstacles that even non-scientific person could think of, let alone once we get into philosophical issues (for things we don't even have words to talk about yet).
Let me pose this question to you then: What happens when capitalism and high technology blend? The people who matter want this tech he describes: genetic tailoring, nanotech, and robotics.
Gene manipulation and immunoresets are possible, but for the elite few who can afford it. Genetic diseases are rid of by tailoring non-disease marrow and injecting them. I remember when the Human Genome project started... almost 15 years to complete. SARS took 29 days.
We already use nanotech in our everyday life. Exactly how do they rate CPUs and GPUs? That's right, by the process they used to create it. Nanotech doesnt mean nano-robots, but will eventually. Nanotech means we can manipulate 1/10^6 m. We also see nanotech by the labs on a chip used in biowarfare detection the military is currently using. It's there, hiding in plain sight.
Robotics is the hardest now, but that's only because we dont have a powerful enough vision system processor. Once we have that, things will get scary crazy (as in Story of Manna crazy). And along with "robotics" we have plenty of software to run some interesting things right now. Some guy in his garage built a fully automatic heart-targetting gun turret ala Team Fortress Classic using homemade gear and COTS parts. 2 webcams with parallax was all he needed for basic motion/depth detection.
---Yet there is still a very simple reason why the prediction will not happen. Does he know how long it takes for FDA to approve a brain implant of the kind he is suggesting (even if we had one)?
Which is why the USA will stagnate. We need less of these BS laws and allowances for scientists to experiment with accepting subjects who qualify as sane. We could have a working bionic plugin eye if it wasnt for the stranglehold the FDA and AMA hold on the USA. I'd say the FDA needs to be neutered to a "recommend/do not recommend" if exist at all.
---I've said it before and I will say it again. This is nothing more than a religion posing as pseudo-science from a guy who takes 200 anti-aging pills hoping to reach immortality though technology.
My parents started taking supplements after hearing from news broadcasts and Dr Oz on Oprah. I chose not to, while observing what happens. One such drug is resveratrol, along with l-lysene and massive dosages of vitamin C(4g a day). My mom took glucosamine and chrondroitin sulfate for her back after a friend (who is a veterinarian) recommended it to her. Animal clinics use that complex specifically for severe arthritis for animals. No company can make money for paying the required fees for the FDA and stays a "supplement". My mom with glucosamine/chrondroitin healed her back with it to 100%.
Well, back to he new drugs.. My mom and dad started the cocktail. My dad's bald on the top, or was. One of those drugs is actually regrowing his hair. We're not sure if it's C, resveratrol, or l-lysene, but it's something. Rogane (?) never worked. My mom's knees also cracked and stuff in the joints. Now she can feel her knees healing.
They took Linus Pauling's recommendation on massive C dosages and seem to work as he claimed. Considering he won 2 Nobels in 2 fields, we respect him, even if the medical society does not. I have thought about following this same regimen and recording my progress, as it does seem to work for them (placebo is not strong enough to grow hair that hasnt in 20+ years).
---But one thing is for sure, Kurzweil will die just like every other "prophet" before him.
Maybe.
I really fail to grasp why corporations (NOT individuals) fail to understand the ramifications of such EULAs and MS software contracts.
Negotiating a seat deal with MS leads to a very nasty possible outcome: invasion by Business Software Alliance. If you refuse, you invalidate all your licenses... and they always find something "illegal". It's one thing to switch because of some perceived wrong or being high and mighty, but a corporation is a corporation. When it comes to software, they literally open themselves up for heavy liability if they accept MS and other COTS software.
GPL means something else too: if you dont create software, you can ignore any "bad side effects". Only violators who refuse to share source are gone after. Usage is truly free of legal ramifications.
To bring the analogy into context, would that mean that copyright infringement now will have a lower standard of evidence?
In the USA, all it takes is a cop to say "I saw him going 75 because I was going 75 to match him"... and he is believed regardless.
Copyright Court? "I downloaded X song from Y IP address, and I'm hired by the rightsholder. Fine him!" 100$ fine. Little/no recourse.
You're one of the reasons I still read Slashdot. You maintain a polite, accurate, and to the point commentary. If I was the article writer, I'd understand the issue more.
Well said.
Do YOU want to be the one to wager that quantum theory is 100% correct and possibly have your data compromised?
Ok. What is an observer?
Or better yet, what would happen if some new device could record without observing?
---Quantum cryptography isn't a cipher. It's a method of transmitting data, which does one specific thing, which is guarantee that you'll be able to tell if people have attempted to eavesdrop. It's not a complete cryptosystem; it's not meant to be. It's meant to be just one component of cryptosystems, and in doing what it does, it's provably secure in the sense that secure is being used here.
Of course not. quantum crypto solves the problem with OTP's: secure transmission of the OTP lookup sheet itself. I forget the bit rate of the machine, but it's something damned slow (100 bits/s?). The ultimate problem with any crypto system is still the people though. Too bad it doesnt fix that ^_^
---(Incidentally, mathematical proofs aren't like scientific proofs; it *is* possible to prove with absolute certainty in mathematics.)
Also, unfortunately, QC math isnt a math proof. It's a proof on physics that attempts to estimate the real math of our universe. Until we know the "real" math, there will be holes in our knowledge, and therefore unprovable. It's probably pretty accurate though, but is it accurate to trust?
---How is your mathemetician going to distribute his one time pad?
A one time pad guarantees perfect secrecy. A QC channel allows secrecy as any "listening" devices become in part with the system, thereby allowing detection.
I do think this is a bit excessive by stating.. Data is always time-dependent. Therefore, we only need protect data for X amount of years.
What combination of encryption technologies can we use to make the data physically hard to crack? We need a multi-tiered encryption setup that uses multiple algorithms and multiple layers. Assuming mathematical proof of said encryption and no holes in implementation, we can calculate CPU years in brute-forcing each layer. Also, assuming that MIPS/s is increasing exponentially, we can calculate a "cracked by" date, and wrap said data in the date we need.
Having "perfect" data integrity and "perfect" communication seems... not right. It's just a gut feeling.
American Scientist ran an article about Light traps for light processing, Tip-of-the-Tongue processing states of memory and speech creation, Parkinson's Disease discussion, and a Moon surface discussion.
And Scientific American (spit) runs yet another optical illusion article. I knew there was a reason why we dumped them and went AmSci.
That's only true with CSMA/CD and not with token passing message structure.
Hey, I didnt want to give away the plot for those that wish to read it.
So I'm not the only one to read Job: A comedy of errors!
;).
I love that end of the book.. I could see heaven and hell just like that. Too bad about Margarethe (sp?), though she did deserve it
I was thinking on the lines of identifying the security detail by performing said actions, but I'd rather make a joke of them than hurt them.
Like after said Target Prayer is surrounded, have 20-30 people say "If this were not a drill, we have identified all security personnel. Fortunately, we are Jokester Group $name."
Better safety precautions when on a 300 person missile is usually a better thing. Crap like facecrime is just criminally stupid because it really tells no information.
Find what makes it tick and have as many people do "facecrime" or whatever gobbledygook they call it. 30 people doing something weird (not illegal and not evil) would do some funny things on an airplane.
I'm thinking of something like that Improv group in New York City and their shenanigans.
I wonder if Christians think Wicca is obscene?
I wonder if MADD thinks alcohol recipe website are obscene?
I wonder if Luddites think technology is obscene?
Really. I dont wonder at all. It's pretty damn evident that certain groups think other groups are obscene. Just as beauty, obscenity is in the eye of the beholder too. Declaring something an obscenity is just a way that group can actively pretend it doesnt exist: censorship.
---Did you read the rest of his comments? He actually believes that artists don't need to work for money. He believes that the awesome power of music will be sufficient to put food on the table, plus finance their instruments, recording devices, and distribution methods. Hell, they probably won't even be able to afford internet access without a decent job. This guy is living in a fantasy world, one carefully constructed to justify and validate his opinions. It seems, like I said, that he has defined his taste in music to be in line with his political view of copyright, and also he has defined everyone else's taste in music to be in line with that. Hence he feels no remorse in peddling these crazy fantasies as fact. It's just a sad indicator of the times really.
True, some of it IS pie-in-the-sky, but following the pure capitalistic style also destroys arts! Why? I've seen this same behavior in each "artist colony" town I lived in, and they all die the same way.
First, groups of artists move out of a big city to the countryside where prices are cheaper for property and they can get peace and quiet for their work. Usually they will inhabit a small town not connected by any interstate or major thoroughfare. After a while, more people bring more artists hearing of a colony. Words of them follow and we see the start of "trinkets dealers" who sell 'handcrafted' goods from china at the truly handcrafted price. Time goes on and we see more artisans being replaced by junk dealers, while the prices of land skyrocket due to the new influx of people who sell prefab goods. The eventual downfall is when there is 1 or 2 artists left, in their retiring age. Through this time, about 30-50 years passed.
I once lived near a town in its last stages (Metamora, IN), and now I live in a town 20 years in. The recent recession has killed off many a junk dealers, with detriment to the people. One rich person has purchased 1/3~1/2 the land in Nashville (IN) and now sits on it all charging excessive rent. The net effect is that artists literally cant even live in Nashville.
Honestly, artists need money to survive. However, one does not become an artist to make scads of money. There's some happy medium between hippie-happy and money-grabber.
---How does it exit copyright?
That's simple. The GPL was created to convert the US system of copyright to a communistic version instead. Because he cannot nullify copyright, he had to create a license in which effectively substituted it. He rightfully realized that Communism broke down in the world due to rationing of limited goods (something that capitalism IS good at). Software can be copied for costs that approach 0, therefore communism could work.
---It shows some software developers are willing to contribute their work for free.
That's just not true. Lets look at the kernel team: is Linus working for free? Heh, no! We can go down the list and most of them are paid members of corporations that value their work. File systems are a commodity, as are web browsers, file browsers, movie players, web servers, you name it. It just happens that the transfer of money is flipped in a new way.
I would also bet that many of the vertical FLOSS apps are paid by the support people (ex. Asterisk).
---It says nothing about the quality of the software,
Those who have the skill (ourselves, or paid to inspect) can verify that for ourselves. Also, COTS has no guarantee or fitness. You act that FLOSS does.. Weird. I remember the EULAs on Sun's software that says 'we arent responsible if you use this software in a nuclear reactor'. MS and the rest of the gang dont guarantee quality either.
---and it says nothing about anything else besides software.
Can that not be said of any software? The GPL was a legal and monetary construct to combat what Stallman did not like. It just seems to work.. Or at least all 18000 packages on my Debian colo server work flawlessly.
---It also gives no hints as to the repercussions of removing the choice