if by snoop you mean connect to a program that the user willfully loaded and interact with that program in it's normal manner of operation then yes people can do that.
assuming otherwise is as silly as the "if you are a cop you are not allowed to enter this site" disclaimers that used to be all over the internet
I don't think you know what a private investigator is. They're someone paid to gather evidence to testify in court. They don't get special rights to "snoop" or trespass. But they do get special obligations to maintain accurate records. PI's aren't law enforcement and they're not just witnesses.
The issue isn't whether the evidence they collected is private or public. The issue is whether they were paid to gather evidence. Mediasentry are private individuals paid to produce evidence without any certification of being able to handle evidence...
Don't forget that Canada is the biggest country for Curling... pretty intimidating stuff. It keeps the Americans out knowing many Canadian households are armed with brooms.
How is it capitalism if you don't have to compete with my product, but just give my product away and claim it is yours?
Information isn't a product. Secondly capitalism requires informed consumers, so claiming it's mine should be fraud. See Moral Rights which is a separate issue from copyright. Note the US doesn't recognize Moral Rights.
In fact it is the complete antithesis of creativity and culture, because it enables everyone to re-use other peoples creative works rather than make their own.
Culture and creativity aren't only expressed through original works. By using elements of others work, an artist can make an arrangement that is far superior to the sum of its parts.
If I could get people to buy the Sims from me, without having to bother making it, that sounds like an easy life.
That does sound like an easy life.. but it doesn't work that way. The "getting people to buy" isn't magic, you have to give them reason to pay you.
Is the world a better place because there are now 2 competing products? or would we be better off if everyone just copies the first one?
I find it interesting you think that there'd be less products in a world where people can re-use elements of others arts. I find it far more likely that there's a Sims Sopranos, Sims Lost, Sims X-Men and many other derivative works that just are to risky in current climate.
I'm glad CCP had to make eve on-line rather than just making Elite Online. I'm glad that I have the choice between world of warcraft and lord of the rings on-line.
Games rarely advance from original ideas. World of Warcraft reused and polished elements of earlier games. Don't kid yourself into thinking these were great works of creativity, it's exactly what I'm arguing, recycling and incremental improvements of ideas. Had CCP made Elite Online, they'd have gone out of business for failing to advance. There have been competing Warcraft servers for years, and it hasn't stopped Blizzard from making expansions. In fact by adding content Blizzard is keeping those rogue servers obsolete. That's competition, and Blizzard has the advantage by the nature of their position.
Killing off intellectual property is the best way imaginable to totally kill off competition. Nobody can compete with free and their is zero incentive to innovate if you can just carbon-copy the market-leader without penalty.
Of course people can compete with free, by providing better service and timely updates. I never argued for killing IP. I believe in expanded fair use and drastically shorter terms. Do you expect to be making money off five year old games? Do your current games make your games from 5 years ago appear obsolete? With a five year copyright, you'd have a five year head-start on the competition. You update your software, then that's 5 more years for the updated version.
Quake 1 was released in 1996, Quake 3 was released in 1999. Also in 1999, Quake 1 was released GPL, giving others the legal ability to make derivative games that could potentially compete with Q3. (And that's giving the source away instead of keeping it hidden like most games do)
So what work of yours is going to be relevant 50 years after your death? What work do you expect to still be selling copies from 5 years from it's release. Certainly not Kudos, why would I buy that with Kudos 2 out. I've purchased a couple of your games, and they're fine games, but they'll all be forgotten in 5 years... except maybe the influence they may have on other games.
The responses here are sickening... The real failure about this story is that Verizon offered to help at all instead of flat out refusing without a warrant.
Police want Verizon to help them find someone hiding and it sounds like without a warrant. It's the same idea behind the Warrantless wiretap program. A little spin on a story and suddenly slashdot's are in love with the idea.
Suicide sucks and the authorities should try to stop it but they shouldn't be allowed to compel people to help. Companies certainly shouldn't be giving up their customer info just because the government has "good intentions".
The site mindlessly posts two or three pro-piracy articles per day to appease the masses, who will subsequently drive up ad revenues by clicking and posting about how evil they think capitalism is.
Capitalism is about competition. Intellectual Property is about suppressing competition by granting monopolies. IP laws are inherently anti-capitalistic. It seems the modern definition of capitalism is government ensuring companies profit despite their successes or failures. That really is corporatism.
The show wasn't about "unstoppable killing machines". It was about infiltrating machines. Skynet's goals in the show generally are more about sabotage of the resistance and building it's own powerbase.
There are so many packages nowadays that maybe the "browser as an OS" is a good model to go by. We need different distros for Firefox. A distro being a package of addons and styling, maintained and organized by third-parties.
Wouldn't a mild current be better? It would eliminate the issues with sound/vibration, and it should cause the batteries to last longer. Granted it would require direct contact to skin, but I would think something could easily be done by wiring the lining of underwear. The compass, power and electronics would be in a detachable unit, so it'd be completely washable (probably would want low heat for dryer). I suspect once you get some practice (with a decent plan) it wouldn't take more then a few minutes to wire a new set of underwear. It'd be cheap and invisible but you'd have to calibrate the compass based on where you clip it.
I was actually thinking a while ago of a similar project. It would have several antennas (or ultrasonic emitters) and similar electrical feedback to act as a shortrange radar. So you'd be able to sense things behind you. Perhaps use a pulsed doppler system it could track range, speed and cross-section size. With a little computation it could even predict if something will hit you at an unsafe speed (spidey sense!). The main problem is where it could be put without a lot of noise, if it was a belt your arms would interfere with it. A collar would probably work best but it'd be fugly.
I do think to a degree, these war games can be an encouragement for using violence to work out your frustration... Inevitably someone will start to take things too seriously, so we have rules in place where we can send them off to cool down. I think banning it because some might have obvious mental instabilities that would make this lead them to shoot people with real guns is absurd.
If we accept their argument that paintballing leads to violent tendencies, what happens to all the paintballers? If they really believe their argument then it means they'll be taking the emotional release away from a crowd of people they're saying are violent killers in the making. I guess they prefer frustrated violent people to pacified violent people.
People release their frustrations different ways, some healthy and some not. It's not harmful to others and it's not self destructive, there's far worse things. Some people deal with their problems with alcohol, and I'm sure that leads to a lot more violence then paintballing.
So I think you're right, it does encourage "violence" (at least in those that can't separate pretend violence from real violence) but it also helps to mollify it. Sadly the people that may be influenced the most by play-acting out violence are also probably unstable enough that they need some kind of outlet. The best that can be done for them is to teach them healthy boundaries (like the cooldowns you mentioned).
Sure, if you know nothing about security. Why does everyone think wired is so secure? I would say well implemented wireless networks are more secure than the average wired network. This is because well implemented wireless networks have strong authentication (e.g. client side certificates) and encryption whereas most wired networks do not have these things.
And tell me how that stops me from jamming the wireless frequency bands. Security isn't just confidentiality, it's also protecting yourself from DoS.
You can implement strong authentication on wired connections as well. Really what you're saying is "Wireless is more secure because it's so insecure at physical layer that we had to implement proper network security"
The other poster argued that truly encrypted data should be indistinguishable from white noise. I pointed out that a) stenography disrupted the image coloring and therefore should be detectable...Encrypted information will stand out as structured data.
I'll disprove you with a trivial example. If I use white noise as a one-time pad then the encrypted data is indistinguishable from white noise.
One of those is a truly randomly generated string. One of those is the encrypted string for my cleartext: 00 00 00 00 00 00 01 00 00 00 What you're saying is that one is random, while one is not... Which is which? I even made my plain-text full of patterns for you, this would make it easier for you... if it were a problem that was possible to solve.
As far as stego, you actually have it backwards the encrypted data is too unstructured, it's too random. By adding encrypted data to structured data, you're making the image LESS structured.
By using a structured pad you make the OTP solvable... (which is why you don't do it) 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 0A 01 02 03 04 05 06 06 08 09 0A
Any kind of analysis that answers the question of whether a piece of data is random or deterministic can't do so with certainty. You can't prove a string of a million 1's wasn't randomly generated. Every piece of random data long enough will have substrings that appear to be a pattern.
Give a voice recognition program a low enough certainty threshold and it'll pick out words from below the noise floor. But the lower you go, it'll make more and more mistakes and eventually it'll pick out words from plain white noise.
Judging by the action taken by the CHP (suspending the two officers involved) they didn't have the right to release the images in the manner that they did.
I should clarify... because your response doesn't contradict my post
CHP has the right to release; that's CHP as an organization. CHP officers don't have the right, it's not within their duty description. Hence why they were disciplined.
So taking CHP to court is meaningless, even if they didn't desire to release the photos, they had the right. CHP disciplining it's officers is the right course because the officers acted out of line.
What this whole situation shows is that "intellectual property" is still a good idea, if legislators hadn't completely distorted it. The pictures exploit the public image of Nikki Catsouras, they should be the property of her family. Aside from use in police investigations, the CHP has no right in delivering those photographs to anyone.
They exploit the public image of a corpse. Why does that need protection? No the court got this right. This is within the CHP's right to release. What about all the damage she caused. The public has a right to the information through FOIA. When you do stupid shit, don't expect to censor it from public view. Had she lived, then privacy would be deserved until she could go to a fair trial...
Now the dispatchers should be disciplined, while the CHP has the right, the employees shouldn't act above their authority.
This sounds like a good old physical attack to me, not a cyber attack. Bashing in someone's computer with a hammer is not the same thing as a infiltrating it with a computer virus/worm/etc.
It's a cyber-attack because it's attacking cyber capabilities. The damage caused was more then just the physical fiber, it will result in failures in other machines. The denial of service extends beyond what was physically destroyed. Bashing a computer could be a cyber attack or just plain vandalism depending if that computer provides network services. Bash in the desktop of the CEO of AT&T, vandalism, his computer is just a host. Bash in an NTP (time) server at a community college and it's a cyber attack.
Just like chaff, flares and decoys are examples of electronic attack without any electronics because they attack electronic warfare (radar) capabilities.
There is no happy medium or acceptable compromise for across-the-board filters. What's far too permissive for one parent is far too restrictive for another. As long as the school is deciding the list they'll be taking criticism. The only viewpoints heard will be the most vocal (who are likely the most whacko).
The blocker should be configurable on a user account basis based on the parents preferences. If one parent wants a blacklist that blocks only from the porn module, then they have that checked. If another parent wants their kid only able to access websites from a whitelist published by Discovery Institute let them. It shifts the argument for blocklists from "My kid shouldn't see X" to "No kid should see X" which is a lot easier to reject.
If it's during class time then the teacher should be able to apply their own lists as well. Only if the URL passes both the teacher and parent lists could the student view it. Actually maybe the teacher should be able to bypass the parents list if the content is a part of class curriculum.
Yes, I realize that the kid with loose restrictions will just show the other kids. But that's no different then porn magazines back before the internet. I guarantee the students have found porn that gets through the filter and tell all their friends.
It's a moot point whether it was a legal or illegal wiretap. Either way corruption abounds.
If it was a legal wiretap, burying the evidence is corrupt. If it was an illegal wiretap, using the illegitimate evidence to blackmail the representative is wrong. So either way Gonzalez is wrong.
Luckily there's enough corruption all around to make it a non-issue.
Really the only thing that needs fixing is the person that reported this story. But I'm sure that's an issue that will be resolved quickly.
It also depends on success rate they observed. I can be right more often then not with an algorithm that involves no counting. Select one unique object and follow it as it moves between screens (ignore all others) and go towards that that one. If there is 3 on one side and 2 on other, I'll be right 60% of time but clearly I have no concept of counting. Are the items similar enough they can't be distinguished? (Do they tilt a certain way on string, different heights?)
Plus with small numbers you can use nested ifs to map it that are clearly not arithmetic. I wouldn't be surprised if they're tracking a small subset of the items and being successful based on statistics. There's a difference between:
1. X=a+b+c+d; 2. if a&b&c&d X=4; else if (a&b&c)|(a&c&d)|(a&b&d)|(b&c&d) X=3; else if (a&b)|(a&c)|(a&d)|(b&c)|(b&d)|(c&d) X=2; else if a|b|c|d X=1; else X=0; 3. foreach i in set do X+=i; #feel free to complain about my lack of initialization
One's arithmetic, one's complex logic, and one's abstraction (with arithmetic). For small numbers it can be very hard to tell the difference between them. I think most people use complex logic for arithmetic (i.e. multiplication tables).
Oh, what about this new Wi-Fi equipment? Guess what the pilot has in the cockpit -- the "OFF" switch. If he suspects interference from that system, he can turn it off instantly to see if the problem goes away.
He can turn off the access point, and all the other devices will try to reconnect. Unless he has an off switch to the passengers' laptops too, if so I'm impressed.
For the export market Chinese companies have to import legal components from somone who has a license. So if you work for US processor manufacturer for example, IP law is protecting your job. I suspect that if you have an engineering job in a rich country, IP licensing is one of the things that pays your salary.
GP was complaining about long term IP rights. So in effect you're saying that we're protecting the Pentium 2 processor from being copied (released 1997). I think it's had enough time with protection and should be allowed to be copied
and who is at fault? the ones causing all the trouble over it? or the one shoving it in their face while they'd rather just not know? imo both are just as wrong
If they didn't want to know about the person, they wouldn't be viewing their profile. If I asked you to tell me about yourself and you identify yourself as a Christian, is that shoving your religion in my face?
Slashdot Mirror
if by snoop you mean connect to a program that the user willfully loaded and interact with that program in it's normal manner of operation then yes people can do that.
assuming otherwise is as silly as the "if you are a cop you are not allowed to enter this site" disclaimers that used to be all over the internet
I don't think you know what a private investigator is. They're someone paid to gather evidence to testify in court. They don't get special rights to "snoop" or trespass. But they do get special obligations to maintain accurate records. PI's aren't law enforcement and they're not just witnesses.
The issue isn't whether the evidence they collected is private or public. The issue is whether they were paid to gather evidence. Mediasentry are private individuals paid to produce evidence without any certification of being able to handle evidence...
Hockey is our national sport.
Actually, it's Lacrosse.
Don't forget that Canada is the biggest country for Curling... pretty intimidating stuff. It keeps the Americans out knowing many Canadian households are armed with brooms.
Ugh how bout a suggestion that doesn't get all of us heretics burned at the stake. Simple votes like that just turn into tools to oppress minorities.
How is it capitalism if you don't have to compete with my product, but just give my product away and claim it is yours?
Information isn't a product. Secondly capitalism requires informed consumers, so claiming it's mine should be fraud. See Moral Rights which is a separate issue from copyright. Note the US doesn't recognize Moral Rights.
In fact it is the complete antithesis of creativity and culture, because it enables everyone to re-use other peoples creative works rather than make their own.
Culture and creativity aren't only expressed through original works. By using elements of others work, an artist can make an arrangement that is far superior to the sum of its parts.
If I could get people to buy the Sims from me, without having to bother making it, that sounds like an easy life.
That does sound like an easy life.. but it doesn't work that way. The "getting people to buy" isn't magic, you have to give them reason to pay you.
Is the world a better place because there are now 2 competing products? or would we be better off if everyone just copies the first one?
I find it interesting you think that there'd be less products in a world where people can re-use elements of others arts. I find it far more likely that there's a Sims Sopranos, Sims Lost, Sims X-Men and many other derivative works that just are to risky in current climate.
I'm glad CCP had to make eve on-line rather than just making Elite Online. I'm glad that I have the choice between world of warcraft and lord of the rings on-line.
Games rarely advance from original ideas. World of Warcraft reused and polished elements of earlier games. Don't kid yourself into thinking these were great works of creativity, it's exactly what I'm arguing, recycling and incremental improvements of ideas. Had CCP made Elite Online, they'd have gone out of business for failing to advance. There have been competing Warcraft servers for years, and it hasn't stopped Blizzard from making expansions. In fact by adding content Blizzard is keeping those rogue servers obsolete. That's competition, and Blizzard has the advantage by the nature of their position.
Killing off intellectual property is the best way imaginable to totally kill off competition. Nobody can compete with free and their is zero incentive to innovate if you can just carbon-copy the market-leader without penalty.
Of course people can compete with free, by providing better service and timely updates. I never argued for killing IP. I believe in expanded fair use and drastically shorter terms. Do you expect to be making money off five year old games? Do your current games make your games from 5 years ago appear obsolete? With a five year copyright, you'd have a five year head-start on the competition. You update your software, then that's 5 more years for the updated version.
Quake 1 was released in 1996, Quake 3 was released in 1999. Also in 1999, Quake 1 was released GPL, giving others the legal ability to make derivative games that could potentially compete with Q3. (And that's giving the source away instead of keeping it hidden like most games do)
So what work of yours is going to be relevant 50 years after your death? What work do you expect to still be selling copies from 5 years from it's release. Certainly not Kudos, why would I buy that with Kudos 2 out. I've purchased a couple of your games, and they're fine games, but they'll all be forgotten in 5 years... except maybe the influence they may have on other games.
The responses here are sickening... The real failure about this story is that Verizon offered to help at all instead of flat out refusing without a warrant.
Police want Verizon to help them find someone hiding and it sounds like without a warrant. It's the same idea behind the Warrantless wiretap program. A little spin on a story and suddenly slashdot's are in love with the idea.
Suicide sucks and the authorities should try to stop it but they shouldn't be allowed to compel people to help. Companies certainly shouldn't be giving up their customer info just because the government has "good intentions".
The site mindlessly posts two or three pro-piracy articles per day to appease the masses, who will subsequently drive up ad revenues by clicking and posting about how evil they think capitalism is.
Capitalism is about competition. Intellectual Property is about suppressing competition by granting monopolies. IP laws are inherently anti-capitalistic. It seems the modern definition of capitalism is government ensuring companies profit despite their successes or failures. That really is corporatism.
The show wasn't about "unstoppable killing machines". It was about infiltrating machines. Skynet's goals in the show generally are more about sabotage of the resistance and building it's own powerbase.
There are so many packages nowadays that maybe the "browser as an OS" is a good model to go by. We need different distros for Firefox. A distro being a package of addons and styling, maintained and organized by third-parties.
Wouldn't a mild current be better? It would eliminate the issues with sound/vibration, and it should cause the batteries to last longer. Granted it would require direct contact to skin, but I would think something could easily be done by wiring the lining of underwear. The compass, power and electronics would be in a detachable unit, so it'd be completely washable (probably would want low heat for dryer). I suspect once you get some practice (with a decent plan) it wouldn't take more then a few minutes to wire a new set of underwear. It'd be cheap and invisible but you'd have to calibrate the compass based on where you clip it.
I was actually thinking a while ago of a similar project. It would have several antennas (or ultrasonic emitters) and similar electrical feedback to act as a shortrange radar. So you'd be able to sense things behind you. Perhaps use a pulsed doppler system it could track range, speed and cross-section size. With a little computation it could even predict if something will hit you at an unsafe speed (spidey sense!). The main problem is where it could be put without a lot of noise, if it was a belt your arms would interfere with it. A collar would probably work best but it'd be fugly.
I do think to a degree, these war games can be an encouragement for using violence to work out your frustration... Inevitably someone will start to take things too seriously, so we have rules in place where we can send them off to cool down. I think banning it because some might have obvious mental instabilities that would make this lead them to shoot people with real guns is absurd.
If we accept their argument that paintballing leads to violent tendencies, what happens to all the paintballers? If they really believe their argument then it means they'll be taking the emotional release away from a crowd of people they're saying are violent killers in the making. I guess they prefer frustrated violent people to pacified violent people.
People release their frustrations different ways, some healthy and some not. It's not harmful to others and it's not self destructive, there's far worse things. Some people deal with their problems with alcohol, and I'm sure that leads to a lot more violence then paintballing.
So I think you're right, it does encourage "violence" (at least in those that can't separate pretend violence from real violence) but it also helps to mollify it. Sadly the people that may be influenced the most by play-acting out violence are also probably unstable enough that they need some kind of outlet. The best that can be done for them is to teach them healthy boundaries (like the cooldowns you mentioned).
Duke Nukem Forever is dead... But look forward to Duke Nukem Forever: The Movie
Maybe they'll make a game to tie-in with the movie.
Sure, if you know nothing about security. Why does everyone think wired is so secure? I would say well implemented wireless networks are more secure than the average wired network. This is because well implemented wireless networks have strong authentication (e.g. client side certificates) and encryption whereas most wired networks do not have these things.
And tell me how that stops me from jamming the wireless frequency bands. Security isn't just confidentiality, it's also protecting yourself from DoS.
You can implement strong authentication on wired connections as well. Really what you're saying is "Wireless is more secure because it's so insecure at physical layer that we had to implement proper network security"
The other poster argued that truly encrypted data should be indistinguishable from white noise. I pointed out that a) stenography disrupted the image coloring and therefore should be detectable...Encrypted information will stand out as structured data.
I'll disprove you with a trivial example. If I use white noise as a one-time pad then the encrypted data is indistinguishable from white noise.
81 90 0F 37 93 F6 D3 8D 5A 6F
81 90 0F 37 93 F6 D2 8D 5A 6F
One of those is a truly randomly generated string. One of those is the encrypted string for my cleartext:
00 00 00 00 00 00 01 00 00 00
What you're saying is that one is random, while one is not... Which is which? I even made my plain-text full of patterns for you, this would make it easier for you... if it were a problem that was possible to solve.
As far as stego, you actually have it backwards the encrypted data is too unstructured, it's too random. By adding encrypted data to structured data, you're making the image LESS structured.
By using a structured pad you make the OTP solvable... (which is why you don't do it)
01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 0A
01 02 03 04 05 06 06 08 09 0A
BECAUSE random data is just that random.
Any kind of analysis that answers the question of whether a piece of data is random or deterministic can't do so with certainty. You can't prove a string of a million 1's wasn't randomly generated. Every piece of random data long enough will have substrings that appear to be a pattern.
Give a voice recognition program a low enough certainty threshold and it'll pick out words from below the noise floor. But the lower you go, it'll make more and more mistakes and eventually it'll pick out words from plain white noise.
Judging by the action taken by the CHP (suspending the two officers involved) they didn't have the right to release the images in the manner that they did.
I should clarify... because your response doesn't contradict my post
CHP has the right to release; that's CHP as an organization.
CHP officers don't have the right, it's not within their duty description. Hence why they were disciplined.
So taking CHP to court is meaningless, even if they didn't desire to release the photos, they had the right. CHP disciplining it's officers is the right course because the officers acted out of line.
What this whole situation shows is that "intellectual property" is still a good idea, if legislators hadn't completely distorted it. The pictures exploit the public image of Nikki Catsouras, they should be the property of her family. Aside from use in police investigations, the CHP has no right in delivering those photographs to anyone.
They exploit the public image of a corpse. Why does that need protection? No the court got this right. This is within the CHP's right to release. What about all the damage she caused. The public has a right to the information through FOIA. When you do stupid shit, don't expect to censor it from public view. Had she lived, then privacy would be deserved until she could go to a fair trial...
Now the dispatchers should be disciplined, while the CHP has the right, the employees shouldn't act above their authority.
This sounds like a good old physical attack to me, not a cyber attack. Bashing in someone's computer with a hammer is not the same thing as a infiltrating it with a computer virus/worm/etc.
It's a cyber-attack because it's attacking cyber capabilities. The damage caused was more then just the physical fiber, it will result in failures in other machines. The denial of service extends beyond what was physically destroyed. Bashing a computer could be a cyber attack or just plain vandalism depending if that computer provides network services. Bash in the desktop of the CEO of AT&T, vandalism, his computer is just a host. Bash in an NTP (time) server at a community college and it's a cyber attack.
Just like chaff, flares and decoys are examples of electronic attack without any electronics because they attack electronic warfare (radar) capabilities.
There is no happy medium or acceptable compromise for across-the-board filters. What's far too permissive for one parent is far too restrictive for another. As long as the school is deciding the list they'll be taking criticism. The only viewpoints heard will be the most vocal (who are likely the most whacko).
The blocker should be configurable on a user account basis based on the parents preferences. If one parent wants a blacklist that blocks only from the porn module, then they have that checked. If another parent wants their kid only able to access websites from a whitelist published by Discovery Institute let them. It shifts the argument for blocklists from "My kid shouldn't see X" to "No kid should see X" which is a lot easier to reject.
If it's during class time then the teacher should be able to apply their own lists as well. Only if the URL passes both the teacher and parent lists could the student view it. Actually maybe the teacher should be able to bypass the parents list if the content is a part of class curriculum.
Yes, I realize that the kid with loose restrictions will just show the other kids. But that's no different then porn magazines back before the internet. I guarantee the students have found porn that gets through the filter and tell all their friends.
It's a moot point whether it was a legal or illegal wiretap. Either way corruption abounds.
If it was a legal wiretap, burying the evidence is corrupt.
If it was an illegal wiretap, using the illegitimate evidence to blackmail the representative is wrong.
So either way Gonzalez is wrong.
Luckily there's enough corruption all around to make it a non-issue.
Really the only thing that needs fixing is the person that reported this story. But I'm sure that's an issue that will be resolved quickly.
It also depends on success rate they observed. I can be right more often then not with an algorithm that involves no counting. Select one unique object and follow it as it moves between screens (ignore all others) and go towards that that one. If there is 3 on one side and 2 on other, I'll be right 60% of time but clearly I have no concept of counting. Are the items similar enough they can't be distinguished? (Do they tilt a certain way on string, different heights?)
Plus with small numbers you can use nested ifs to map it that are clearly not arithmetic. I wouldn't be surprised if they're tracking a small subset of the items and being successful based on statistics. There's a difference between:
1. X=a+b+c+d;
2. if a&b&c&d X=4;
else if (a&b&c)|(a&c&d)|(a&b&d)|(b&c&d) X=3;
else if (a&b)|(a&c)|(a&d)|(b&c)|(b&d)|(c&d) X=2;
else if a|b|c|d X=1;
else X=0;
3. foreach i in set do X+=i; #feel free to complain about my lack of initialization
One's arithmetic, one's complex logic, and one's abstraction (with arithmetic). For small numbers it can be very hard to tell the difference between them. I think most people use complex logic for arithmetic (i.e. multiplication tables).
You can have your member card back. 4th of February has passed in all time zones I know of
Don't listen to him, it's an April fools joke! We're really still in January!
Oh, what about this new Wi-Fi equipment? Guess what the pilot has in the cockpit -- the "OFF" switch. If he suspects interference from that system, he can turn it off instantly to see if the problem goes away.
He can turn off the access point, and all the other devices will try to reconnect. Unless he has an off switch to the passengers' laptops too, if so I'm impressed.
I don't think that the monkey had that bad of aim.
Chimps aren't monkeys. They're apes.
...I'm only saying because your mom doesn't like being called a monkey.
For the export market Chinese companies have to import legal components from somone who has a license. So if you work for US processor manufacturer for example, IP law is protecting your job. I suspect that if you have an engineering job in a rich country, IP licensing is one of the things that pays your salary.
GP was complaining about long term IP rights. So in effect you're saying that we're protecting the Pentium 2 processor from being copied (released 1997). I think it's had enough time with protection and should be allowed to be copied
and who is at fault? the ones causing all the trouble over it? or the one shoving it in their face while they'd rather just not know? imo both are just as wrong
If they didn't want to know about the person, they wouldn't be viewing their profile. If I asked you to tell me about yourself and you identify yourself as a Christian, is that shoving your religion in my face?