Interesting link! the ground water rule http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-WATER/2000/May/Day-10/w10763.htm would be the specific one that applies here? It will be fun to see how quickly the EPA or other organisations mobilise based on this data. It sounds like a lot of work to remedy these problems once found.
Mostly they show up when in creative mode because you can have areas of the scene that can't be pulled into focus, and when shooting dirty glass. I've been really happy with the picture quality in general though, and am sure that improvements in the software/algorithms will help a lot. https://pictures.lytro.com/tophertuttle/pictures/544030
I think the big question is about how the legal system tries to separate the ability of a human mind to weigh and process information to reach a decision from the collection of facts and evidence presented as part of a trial. The jurors sought are those at the intersection between people with large collections of 'well processed' information and those with no knowledge that could in any way relate to the case.
This is like saying that for a fair peer-review of a synthetic biology paper should be performed by an electrical engineer or a statistician, or a sociology paper reviewed by an ecologist. A solid paper would have to be understandable and deemed correct by such a reviewer with reference to an agreed upon collection of textbooks. Even in these cases the common language of math is often shared, and it must be acknowledged that differences in math comprehension could alter the weighting of a paper (for example, knowledge of stochastic modeling...). If a sociology educated reviewer consulted wikipedia for their knowledge of island biogeography in a review of an ecology paper, they risk contamination of that space in the knowledge landscape previously agreed upon as being virgin. This information, even if recognized as inaccurate or deemed by the reviewer to be unimportant, may inadvertently alter the interpretation of the paper.
I personally think that, just as peer reviews in academia are most efficiently performed by experts in the same field, a jury should be comprised of a collection of experts with diverse opinions and backgrounds, culled only for direct knowledge of the case, bias, and inability to communicate and work towards common understanding or solutions (in other words the ability to adjust their interpretations in light of new data or better fitting models).
However under the current system mistrials based on something like this do make sense. I also agree that the juror should be held responsible for the infraction. If you want access to materials on a topic you should be able to request, for example, a list of paper abstracts or a summary agreed upon by both sides. We need to also remember that the 'information' a jury is required to consider may consist of much incorrect data and many deliberate omissions. reaching a verdict is really a pretty abstract puzzle to solve, and extra or different pieces can lead to new options for solutions, so much of the process is dedicated to controlling variables.
I think the government is moving along quite nicely. Maybe within a few years they will have robot versions of all forms of animal life, fighting our wars, chopping our trees, dropping our bombs. Its always good to see a major poitical orginization take its ideas from a best-selling videogame series.
Maybe they can call these things "Reploids", I dunno, has a nice ring to it.
However, when you are constantly avoiding battles with onscreen monsters, you son become grossly underleveled. Some games attempt to cope with gamers who don't wish to level build, by keeping the boss' stats relitive to your own. I don't agree with this. You don't see bosses in Halif life starting with less health simply because you used up all your rockets just prior to the fight. There is supposed to be a challange to RPGs, like any game, and if you tell people they no longer have to face random encounters, and that bosses stay the same level as you, what incentive is there for putting the time into developing strong charecters?
I saw his One Man Star Wars in Victoria awhile ago. Liked it so much I went to see it again the next day. I brought my MD recorder, and now have the whole thing on Minidisc. Its perfect, because the whole preformance lasts excactly as long as my bus commute home!
Instead of spending so much time and effort on transmuting the waste,they should work on mearly sweeping it under a Somebody Else's Problem field. I'd give it a week before society forgot there ever was a problem...
Slashdot Mirror
Interesting link! the ground water rule http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-WATER/2000/May/Day-10/w10763.htm would be the specific one that applies here? It will be fun to see how quickly the EPA or other organisations mobilise based on this data. It sounds like a lot of work to remedy these problems once found.
Mostly they show up when in creative mode because you can have areas of the scene that can't be pulled into focus, and when shooting dirty glass. I've been really happy with the picture quality in general though, and am sure that improvements in the software/algorithms will help a lot.
https://pictures.lytro.com/tophertuttle/pictures/544030
https://pictures.lytro.com/tophertuttle/pictures/544050
https://pictures.lytro.com/tophertuttle/pictures/531986
Also this article makes for an interesting read.
http://eclecti.cc/computervision/reverse-engineering-the-lytro-lfp-file-format
I think the big question is about how the legal system tries to separate the ability of a human mind to weigh and process information to reach a decision from the collection of facts and evidence presented as part of a trial. The jurors sought are those at the intersection between people with large collections of 'well processed' information and those with no knowledge that could in any way relate to the case. This is like saying that for a fair peer-review of a synthetic biology paper should be performed by an electrical engineer or a statistician, or a sociology paper reviewed by an ecologist. A solid paper would have to be understandable and deemed correct by such a reviewer with reference to an agreed upon collection of textbooks. Even in these cases the common language of math is often shared, and it must be acknowledged that differences in math comprehension could alter the weighting of a paper (for example, knowledge of stochastic modeling...). If a sociology educated reviewer consulted wikipedia for their knowledge of island biogeography in a review of an ecology paper, they risk contamination of that space in the knowledge landscape previously agreed upon as being virgin. This information, even if recognized as inaccurate or deemed by the reviewer to be unimportant, may inadvertently alter the interpretation of the paper. I personally think that, just as peer reviews in academia are most efficiently performed by experts in the same field, a jury should be comprised of a collection of experts with diverse opinions and backgrounds, culled only for direct knowledge of the case, bias, and inability to communicate and work towards common understanding or solutions (in other words the ability to adjust their interpretations in light of new data or better fitting models). However under the current system mistrials based on something like this do make sense. I also agree that the juror should be held responsible for the infraction. If you want access to materials on a topic you should be able to request, for example, a list of paper abstracts or a summary agreed upon by both sides. We need to also remember that the 'information' a jury is required to consider may consist of much incorrect data and many deliberate omissions. reaching a verdict is really a pretty abstract puzzle to solve, and extra or different pieces can lead to new options for solutions, so much of the process is dedicated to controlling variables.
I think the government is moving along quite nicely. Maybe within a few years they will have robot versions of all forms of animal life, fighting our wars, chopping our trees, dropping our bombs. Its always good to see a major poitical orginization take its ideas from a best-selling videogame series. Maybe they can call these things "Reploids", I dunno, has a nice ring to it.
However, when you are constantly avoiding battles with onscreen monsters, you son become grossly underleveled. Some games attempt to cope with gamers who don't wish to level build, by keeping the boss' stats relitive to your own. I don't agree with this. You don't see bosses in Halif life starting with less health simply because you used up all your rockets just prior to the fight. There is supposed to be a challange to RPGs, like any game, and if you tell people they no longer have to face random encounters, and that bosses stay the same level as you, what incentive is there for putting the time into developing strong charecters?
I saw his One Man Star Wars in Victoria awhile ago. Liked it so much I went to see it again the next day. I brought my MD recorder, and now have the whole thing on Minidisc. Its perfect, because the whole preformance lasts excactly as long as my bus commute home!
Instead of spending so much time and effort on transmuting the waste,they should work on mearly sweeping it under a Somebody Else's Problem field. I'd give it a week before society forgot there ever was a problem...