My best notes were actually in pen.... more precisely a multi-colored pen. Black for subject headings, blue for text, green for examples, red for important stuff. I have very good memory recall for things like that and it worked well for me. A combination of actually writing down the notes, plus a vivid image in my head what the notes looked like, I found it really easy to recall exactly where in my notes a subject was covered. The problem I have with electronic note taking is that I have little concept on approximately where in my notes something is.. Was it on page 10, 20 or 30? With a physical notepad, I always had a rough idea. Of course I'm older, and my brain never grew up on I-pads.
Contestants (be it cars, people whatever) have an RFID tag (probably passive, 900Mhz RFID) in a name tag or other tag (tag on dash of car) that will give you decent interval timing.
For the finish line, or where timing is more critical, you can supplement with a camera (photo finish if you will).
900Mhz RFID is typically good for 15+ feet (depending on the size of the tag) and can be used reliably up to about 45 feet (big tag on big metal object - like a rail car). Tags can be very cheap - about 25 cents. To 'track humans' you need to keep the tags off the skin (skin detunes/absorbes RF energy) so you need a slightly thicker name tag (foam backed) for reliable reading at range.
Oh, and its already been done. I believe runners right now use a low frequency RFID tag tied to their shoe laces and they have to run over a mat. Low frequency RFID is based more on magnetic fields - thus short range only.
As for cheating, the top competitors in a marathon are watched pretty carfully and their are lots of witnesses. The people running it for themselves.... well who cares if they cheat. Sorta like using an aim-bot on single player mode.
Its not necessarily anti-French, its probably more anti-Paris, and from the attitudes in Paris the feeling is mutual. Go a few kilometers outside the city and suddenly is friendly.
Ah yes, Charles de Gaulle. When he got France out of NATO, and told US President Johnson that he wanted all US troops out of France, Johnson ask "Does that include the ones buried there?"
If this in fact goes any further. The defendant's lawyers are going to argue that there is no specificity in the lawsuit. They will ultimately ask the plaintiffs exactly which elements were copied and why, again with specificity, do the plaintiffs believe they have the copyright. The plaintiffs will try to song and dance around the fact that this is just 'facts'. Might be interesting to hear how they will spin this.
The gist of the article is that MS believes their consultant found some dirt on Android and it's code, which Google seems to think will be very damaging to it's (Motorola's) case, and as a result, all Android devices.
You have to understand how lawsuits work. Team A says they want to get the defendant's middle name, Team B, although they don't see the harm, they move to block it because they will not give Team A a single sliver of evidence that isn't specifically needed.
I was involved in a lawsuit where our lawyer actually blocked the subpoena of meeting minutes - which we had and which we believed supported our claim - because it wasn't necessary (you could just subpoena all the people that were there). Had me worried because the recollection of other people in the meeting seemed to be 'off' (against us). At trial, our lawyer the opposition's story went wild (the exaggerated, lied, made up things etc.) and our lawyer beat them up over it. "You were quoted saying this to the newspaper, you said this in your deposition, and now you say this at trial. Which version is the truth?"
Bottom line, limit the other side's information, limit what they can present in court, and finally, limit the arguments they can make. Chess is a lot easier if you whittle it down to just a few pieces left on the board.
Amazon expressly does not use roads and transportation in Kalifornia. Other companies do - like UPS. And those companies pay to have their trucks registered, pay for fuel (which is heavily taxes), pay taxes on tires, on wages, and if you've ever dealt with the weigh stations, they pay taxes simply by entering the state. Essentially Kailifornia does get revenue from everything sold into Kalifornia - they just want more revenue - and they want an out of state company to collect it for them.
What if Kalifornia thinks Amazon is not paying enough? Are they going to issue warrants for Bezzos's arrest? Bottom line, Kalifornia has no jurisdiction over Amazon and couldn't enforce the tax if they wanted to. What are they going to do? Ban imports from Amazon?
In fact, passive RFID chips are so small and dense (and designed in USA or Europe) there is no room for extra functionality. At best there would be a dozen or so extra transistors sprinkled around. When you are trying to make millions of devices, the more chips you can pack on a wafer yeilds more profit. Also, every extra transistor affects sensitivity.
Finally, these RFID tags are read by a reader. So in theory, one attack vector could be SQL injection. ID lengths are like 96 bits. Not a lot of room for a SQL inject attack.
Now most of these mass produced are built on old tech fabs in East Asia. As the technology matures the ID lengths get longer and longer to the point that one day there might be enough room for more. Right now, nothing to worry about.
To paraphrase someone else: "No one has an 'IT' problem" The might not be able to get financial reports, projects etc. out in time. One of the tools that could help might be an IT asset, but its only a tool. The end goal is to deliver something.
Now if the IT person says "look, we don't have the skill set or bandwidth to actively support 3 completely separate OS's" O.K. then. That's an answer, pay more, go on your own, or adopt their supported system.
If your an English major, get the supported system. If your computer science or related engineering, go on your own. (Run one of each).
If Sony had my credit card info, then that would make sense. They don't and based on recent history they are either not good enough at security, or too lucrative of a target, so they won't get identifiable information.
Quite frankly, I don't even know the user name I used.
If you read other reports, the autopilot disengaged when the air speed indicator was no longer reliable. The junior pilot took over and kept the nose up even when the stall indicator warning (stick shaker?) came on. Through the 3 minute decent he kept 15 degrees nose up. No way they hit v-max. Engines were at full power... as commanded. Supposedly they had stall warnings all the way down.
I seem to remember that some planes the pitot tube also works for the altimeter. It is possible they didn't know how high they were.... or didn't believe the altimeter.
Uhm, that's vertical speed. The problem is the plane slowed down to the point it couldn't maintain proper airflow over the wings. Thus the stall warning.... and well, the stall. Unexplained is why the pilots kept the nose of the plane up. I would imagine at some point that would cause a spin. The recovery procedure for a stall is full power and nose down until your airspeed comes up again.... your forward air speed.
My only thoughts is that the pilots didn't believe the stick shaker since they were pretty sure the speed sensor had failed. So when they started to feel gravity again, they had assumed they had recovered from the stall. Amazing they didn't just turn it into a flat spin... or maybe it was...
Bottom line, without an indicated air speed, its is extremely difficult to figure out how close you are to death. Note that the air speed pitot tubes sometimes double as air pressure indicators..... which is used to get altitude as well. I thought they would have backups... but maybe not.
If I remember the history of the Roswell incident is that it made the news long after everything was cleaned up. Decades later did the stories come out about coverup and what people really saw.
You are an idiot. You sir, would qualify for a job at the TSA.
The point trying to be made is that since the TSA is almost totally ineffective (by all evidence so far) whether they include everyone or not in their searches is completely irrelevant to security.
Try this for size, the odds that your plane will be blown up by terrorists are estimate at 1:30million. The odds of getting cancer from the screening machine are also 1:30million. Its just the second option costs you a boat load of money and time and your privacy.
It governs how a person is treated before the courts. Outside the trial, "probable cause" rules.
Just one example: If a judge thinks someone who is being charged with a crime is a flight risk or a danger to society (based on probable cause) bail is often denied (i.e. the person is kept in jail). No presumption of innocence there.
Planning an illegal act and making an overt step to put that plan in motion is illegal in itself. Buying weapons, explosives, potentially the training with the weapons and explosives. Lying on some forms etc. all potential violations of law.
You are of course correct, there is a possibility that the TSA has deterred terrorist. Unfortunately, there is equal evidence to suggest they have also deterred elephants from getting on planes as well as aliens from outer space.
Hint: you are fighting an organization that has no qualms about using suicide bombers and killing innocents. Your deterrent is that some of them might get caught?
Please read any study on "asymmetric warfare" and its tactics.
lIt's a matter of finding what is reasonable and what actually works, something I think they are a long way from yet. It's the right focus but totally the wrong technique.
I would argue it is in fact the wrong focus. It is focusing on millions of innocent travelers. Lets put it another way. With all the bomb detecting and gun detecting technology employed, how many terrorists were caught... ever? How many terrorist bombs were detected?... ever?
zero.
Of the terrorist that were actually stopped, it was done by passengers!
In a world where companies seem to want short term solutions - training is important. They will throw you away when your training no longer matches their perceived needs."Our client is having issues - they need to expand to 1000 plus machine server farm and the latency in our product is killing them" "Sorry, that is not covered in my training"
Slashdot Mirror
My best notes were actually in pen.... more precisely a multi-colored pen. Black for subject headings, blue for text, green for examples, red for important stuff. I have very good memory recall for things like that and it worked well for me. A combination of actually writing down the notes, plus a vivid image in my head what the notes looked like, I found it really easy to recall exactly where in my notes a subject was covered.
The problem I have with electronic note taking is that I have little concept on approximately where in my notes something is.. Was it on page 10, 20 or 30? With a physical notepad, I always had a rough idea.
Of course I'm older, and my brain never grew up on I-pads.
Contestants (be it cars, people whatever) have an RFID tag (probably passive, 900Mhz RFID) in a name tag or other tag (tag on dash of car) that will give you decent interval timing.
For the finish line, or where timing is more critical, you can supplement with a camera (photo finish if you will).
900Mhz RFID is typically good for 15+ feet (depending on the size of the tag) and can be used reliably up to about 45 feet (big tag on big metal object - like a rail car). Tags can be very cheap - about 25 cents. To 'track humans' you need to keep the tags off the skin (skin detunes/absorbes RF energy) so you need a slightly thicker name tag (foam backed) for reliable reading at range.
Oh, and its already been done. I believe runners right now use a low frequency RFID tag tied to their shoe laces and they have to run over a mat. Low frequency RFID is based more on magnetic fields - thus short range only.
As for cheating, the top competitors in a marathon are watched pretty carfully and their are lots of witnesses. The people running it for themselves.... well who cares if they cheat. Sorta like using an aim-bot on single player mode.
Its not necessarily anti-French, its probably more anti-Paris, and from the attitudes in Paris the feeling is mutual. Go a few kilometers outside the city and suddenly is friendly.
Ah yes, Charles de Gaulle. When he got France out of NATO, and told US President Johnson that he wanted all US troops out of France, Johnson ask "Does that include the ones buried there?"
French view of history seems to be very myopic.
If this in fact goes any further.
The defendant's lawyers are going to argue that there is no specificity in the lawsuit. They will ultimately ask the plaintiffs exactly which elements were copied and why, again with specificity, do the plaintiffs believe they have the copyright. The plaintiffs will try to song and dance around the fact that this is just 'facts'. Might be interesting to hear how they will spin this.
Yeah, and?
The gist of the article is that MS believes their consultant found some dirt on Android and it's code, which Google seems to think will be very damaging to it's (Motorola's) case, and as a result, all Android devices.
You have to understand how lawsuits work. Team A says they want to get the defendant's middle name, Team B, although they don't see the harm, they move to block it because they will not give Team A a single sliver of evidence that isn't specifically needed.
I was involved in a lawsuit where our lawyer actually blocked the subpoena of meeting minutes - which we had and which we believed supported our claim - because it wasn't necessary (you could just subpoena all the people that were there). Had me worried because the recollection of other people in the meeting seemed to be 'off' (against us). At trial, our lawyer the opposition's story went wild (the exaggerated, lied, made up things etc.) and our lawyer beat them up over it. "You were quoted saying this to the newspaper, you said this in your deposition, and now you say this at trial. Which version is the truth?"
Bottom line, limit the other side's information, limit what they can present in court, and finally, limit the arguments they can make. Chess is a lot easier if you whittle it down to just a few pieces left on the board.
A Prius with its rock hard tires takes about 130 ft to stop from 60mph. :)
A corvette about 100ft. Save 30 ft by choosing the right car
Amazon expressly does not use roads and transportation in Kalifornia. Other companies do - like UPS. And those companies pay to have their trucks registered, pay for fuel (which is heavily taxes), pay taxes on tires, on wages, and if you've ever dealt with the weigh stations, they pay taxes simply by entering the state.
Essentially Kailifornia does get revenue from everything sold into Kalifornia - they just want more revenue - and they want an out of state company to collect it for them.
What if Kalifornia thinks Amazon is not paying enough? Are they going to issue warrants for Bezzos's arrest? Bottom line, Kalifornia has no jurisdiction over Amazon and couldn't enforce the tax if they wanted to. What are they going to do? Ban imports from Amazon?
Presumably Amazon still pays income tax and wage tax, but, again presumably, they don't have warehouses in Kalifornia.
In fact, passive RFID chips are so small and dense (and designed in USA or Europe) there is no room for extra functionality. At best there would be a dozen or so extra transistors sprinkled around. When you are trying to make millions of devices, the more chips you can pack on a wafer yeilds more profit. Also, every extra transistor affects sensitivity.
Finally, these RFID tags are read by a reader. So in theory, one attack vector could be SQL injection. ID lengths are like 96 bits. Not a lot of room for a SQL inject attack.
Now most of these mass produced are built on old tech fabs in East Asia. As the technology matures the ID lengths get longer and longer to the point that one day there might be enough room for more. Right now, nothing to worry about.
Seriously, IT is a support service.
To paraphrase someone else:
"No one has an 'IT' problem" The might not be able to get financial reports, projects etc. out in time. One of the tools that could help might be an IT asset, but its only a tool. The end goal is to deliver something.
Now if the IT person says "look, we don't have the skill set or bandwidth to actively support 3 completely separate OS's" O.K. then. That's an answer, pay more, go on your own, or adopt their supported system.
If your an English major, get the supported system. If your computer science or related engineering, go on your own. (Run one of each).
If Sony had my credit card info, then that would make sense. They don't and based on recent history they are either not good enough at security, or too lucrative of a target, so they won't get identifiable information.
Quite frankly, I don't even know the user name I used.
Its just a game console to me
If you read other reports, the autopilot disengaged when the air speed indicator was no longer reliable.
The junior pilot took over and kept the nose up even when the stall indicator warning (stick shaker?) came on. Through the 3 minute decent he kept 15 degrees nose up. No way they hit v-max. Engines were at full power... as commanded. Supposedly they had stall warnings all the way down.
I seem to remember that some planes the pitot tube also works for the altimeter. It is possible they didn't know how high they were.... or didn't believe the altimeter.
Uhm, that's vertical speed. The problem is the plane slowed down to the point it couldn't maintain proper airflow over the wings. Thus the stall warning.... and well, the stall. Unexplained is why the pilots kept the nose of the plane up. I would imagine at some point that would cause a spin. The recovery procedure for a stall is full power and nose down until your airspeed comes up again.... your forward air speed.
My only thoughts is that the pilots didn't believe the stick shaker since they were pretty sure the speed sensor had failed. So when they started to feel gravity again, they had assumed they had recovered from the stall. Amazing they didn't just turn it into a flat spin... or maybe it was...
Bottom line, without an indicated air speed, its is extremely difficult to figure out how close you are to death. Note that the air speed pitot tubes sometimes double as air pressure indicators..... which is used to get altitude as well. I thought they would have backups... but maybe not.
Wait for the final report.
Its not free fall. Once the plane descends at a steady rate, the passengers inside would feel normal gravity.
Only if the plane continues to accelerate downwards would it continue to feel like free fall.
Having been in a plane that was intentionally stalled, It is pretty much like a roller coaster. No one expects a roller coaster at 35,000ft.
If I remember the history of the Roswell incident is that it made the news long after everything was cleaned up. Decades later did the stories come out about coverup and what people really saw.
You are an idiot. You sir, would qualify for a job at the TSA.
The point trying to be made is that since the TSA is almost totally ineffective (by all evidence so far) whether they include everyone or not in their searches is completely irrelevant to security.
Try this for size, the odds that your plane will be blown up by terrorists are estimate at 1:30million. The odds of getting cancer from the screening machine are also 1:30million. Its just the second option costs you a boat load of money and time and your privacy.
http://boingboing.net/2010/11/19/odds-of-cancer-from.html
I kinda hope the lives of the people in line would be worth more than the stupid scanner.
Presumption of innocence is a legal term.
It governs how a person is treated before the courts. Outside the trial, "probable cause" rules.
Just one example:
If a judge thinks someone who is being charged with a crime is a flight risk or a danger to society (based on probable cause) bail is often denied (i.e. the person is kept in jail). No presumption of innocence there.
No, they were not innocent.
Planning an illegal act and making an overt step to put that plan in motion is illegal in itself.
Buying weapons, explosives, potentially the training with the weapons and explosives. Lying on some forms etc. all potential violations of law.
You are of course correct, there is a possibility that the TSA has deterred terrorist. Unfortunately, there is equal evidence to suggest they have also deterred elephants from getting on planes as well as aliens from outer space.
Hint: you are fighting an organization that has no qualms about using suicide bombers and killing innocents. Your deterrent is that some of them might get caught?
Please read any study on "asymmetric warfare" and its tactics.
lIt's a matter of finding what is reasonable and what actually works, something I think they are a long way from yet. It's the right focus but totally the wrong technique.
I would argue it is in fact the wrong focus. It is focusing on millions of innocent travelers. Lets put it another way. With all the bomb detecting and gun detecting technology employed, how many terrorists were caught... ever? How many terrorist bombs were detected?... ever?
zero.
Of the terrorist that were actually stopped, it was done by passengers!
In a world where companies seem to want short term solutions - training is important. They will throw you away when your training no longer matches their perceived needs."Our client is having issues - they need to expand to 1000 plus machine server farm and the latency in our product is killing them" "Sorry, that is not covered in my training"
No problem. They'll just save that money by skipping a few focal length tests on the mirror.... Oh wait...