They're easier to carry, and have two straps, so even if one breaks, your laptop won't go thud. (Like mine did last week. Santa brought me a new laptop today:)
The Nobel prize committee can only choose between those people who are noiminated, they can't nominate people themselves. So he shouldn't bitch to the Nobel committee that they didn't choose him -- they didn't have the option to. He should be bitching to the people who didn't nominate him with the others.
In either case, bitching and whining about not wining a prize is bad form. (I know a similar case where someone's collaborators won the Nobel, but he wasn't nominated. He wasn't happy about it, but his reaction was more "oh well".)
The computer history museum used to be housed in an old warehouse on Moffett Field (which also has a huge hangar that was used for airships). I visited there a while ago, and they have a great collection of stuff.
One of the more interesting things was the internet (or arpanet) router. A six-foot high cabinet. And stuck on the side, was a hand-drawn map of the entire internet. On one piece of 8.5x11. With about 15 nodes. I hope it didn't fall off when they moved it to the new museum.
Check out the Titan Missile Museum in Arizona. About 100 yards off the side of the freeway as you go from Tucson towards Mexico, there's an old silo, with the missile pointing up at you from its hole in the ground.
And how does this help? A watermark will show that you are the author (if it's still readable in a thumbnail). In this case, there was no dispute as to the authorship of the images. It was a question of fair use.
Note that the court also reversed in part the lower court's ruling, specifically saying that the lower court should not have ruled on "whether the display of the larger image is a violation of Kelly's exclusive right to publically display his works."
They did inded say that the lower court should not have ruled on this matter. Which means that it hasn't been decided by the court. Ie - thumbnail are ok, inline linking to an image on another site may or may not be ok, and we won't know until a court case is brought.
I RTA, and the whistleblower claims that the Chinese could have the opportunity to put something malicious into the code. The company claims that work for the US Govt. is not sent out to China. The security agencies say that they audit all outside code anyway.
The bigger issue is not where the code is written, it's whether you can audit the source yourself (and whether you actually do so.
See reflections on trusting trust for a nice article about why, if it really matters, you should be careful with other people's code.
As a proportion of Gross Domestic Product, lots of countries. For example, looking only at indudstrialised countries, you have the Netherlands, France, Japan, Germany and Great Britain who all give more as a proportion of the national wealth in aid.
Ah, mention the DMCA and get modded up...
You don't need to break the law to exploit this. You only need to make api calls to the public api of the recognition system. It's all spelled out in the article.
As I said in a reply to an earlier comment: (cut and pasted...)
If you bothered to RTFA (I know, this is/.), you would find that this exploit does not need access to the biometric data, instead it only needs access to the scoring function.
Put simply: 1. start with some random face 2. ask the system to compute the recognition score for this face 3. make changes to the face 4. compute the new score 5. if the score is higher, keep the change to the face, if the score is lower, reject the change 6. goto 3
You'll notice that nowhere do you have to look at the biometric data itself. You only have to ask the system to compute the recognition score (for which it comes with a handy api).
If you bothered to RTFA (I know, this is/.), you would find that this exploit does not need access to the biometric data, instead it only needs access to the scoring function.
Put simply: 1. start with some random face 2. ask the system to compute the recognition score for this face 3. make changes to the face 4. compute the new score 5. if the score is higher, keep the change to the face, if the score is lower, reject the change 6. goto 3
You'll notice that nowhere do you have to look at the biometric data itself. You only have to ask the system to compute the recognition score (for which it comes with a handy api).
Actually, this idea is so brilliantly simple, that I'm annoyed that I didn't think of it myself (it relates closely to a bunch of work I've done on image reconstruction.
Sounds dubious. If he'd legally bought the building, I'm sure he could have found a good lawyer willing to take care of all the legal hassles for, say, half the value of the building.
IBM's Deep Blue used special purpose chips, so it shouldn't really come as too much of a surprise that general-purpose processors aren't the best for chess computers.
Slashdot Mirror
They're easier to carry, and have two straps, so even if one breaks, your laptop won't go thud. (Like mine did last week. Santa brought me a new laptop today :)
In either case, bitching and whining about not wining a prize is bad form. (I know a similar case where someone's collaborators won the Nobel, but he wasn't nominated. He wasn't happy about it, but his reaction was more "oh well".)
The Science Museum in London has what they claim is the only vaccum-tube (valve, for the English reading) computer that is still running.
They also have a cool collection of other hardware, including part of Babbage's Difference Engine, the worlds first mechanical computer.
One of the more interesting things was the internet (or arpanet) router. A six-foot high cabinet. And stuck on the side, was a hand-drawn map of the entire internet. On one piece of 8.5x11. With about 15 nodes. I hope it didn't fall off when they moved it to the new museum.
And then go watch Dr Strangelove.
Sure did. While I'm paid to be a geek, I find that as I get older my mind enjoys legal subtelties more and more.
And how does this help? A watermark will show that you are the author (if it's still readable in a thumbnail). In this case, there was no dispute as to the authorship of the images. It was a question of fair use.
Any court ruling that footnotes Dr Seuss must be good! (see page 8 of the pdf document)
They did inded say that the lower court should not have ruled on this matter. Which means that it hasn't been decided by the court. Ie - thumbnail are ok, inline linking to an image on another site may or may not be ok, and we won't know until a court case is brought.
The bigger issue is not where the code is written, it's whether you can audit the source yourself (and whether you actually do so.
See reflections on trusting trust for a nice article about why, if it really matters, you should be careful with other people's code.
See here
Ah, mention the DMCA and get modded up... You don't need to break the law to exploit this. You only need to make api calls to the public api of the recognition system. It's all spelled out in the article.
As I said in a reply to an earlier comment:
/.), you would find that this exploit does not need access to the biometric data, instead it only needs access to the scoring function.
(cut and pasted...)
If you bothered to RTFA (I know, this is
Put simply:
1. start with some random face
2. ask the system to compute the recognition score for this face
3. make changes to the face
4. compute the new score
5. if the score is higher, keep the change to the face, if the score is lower, reject the change
6. goto 3
You'll notice that nowhere do you have to look at the biometric data itself. You only have to ask the system to compute the recognition score (for which it comes with a handy api).
If you bothered to RTFA (I know, this is /.), you would find that this exploit does not need access to the biometric data, instead it only needs access to the scoring function.
Put simply:
1. start with some random face
2. ask the system to compute the recognition score for this face
3. make changes to the face
4. compute the new score
5. if the score is higher, keep the change to the face, if the score is lower, reject the change
6. goto 3
You'll notice that nowhere do you have to look at the biometric data itself. You only have to ask the system to compute the recognition score (for which it comes with a handy api).
Actually, this idea is so brilliantly simple, that I'm annoyed that I didn't think of it myself (it relates closely to a bunch of work I've done on image reconstruction.
Sounds dubious. If he'd legally bought the building, I'm sure he could have found a good lawyer willing to take care of all the legal hassles for, say, half the value of the building.
IBM's Deep Blue used special purpose chips, so it shouldn't really come as too much of a surprise that general-purpose processors aren't the best for chess computers.