Medically, some forms of injury, such as spinal cord damage and that percent of ballistic injuries where the bullet lodges in bone rather than passing entirely through the victim seem to be more accurately related to Jerk than to other measurements or derivations, such as G's acceleration or projectile KE. It may also apply to 'whiplash' injuries and just possibly how varying high accelerations cause nausea.
Somewhat, but there's also a physical constraint. Drugs usually emulate natural substances in the body for example, its amazing how much the opiates pass through the same paths as natural endorphins, or LSD 's breakdown prducts resemble natural Serotonin inhibiters. But all these types hit a point in the metabolic processes where the natural enzymes don't break them down further at the normal rates. Generally, they plug up receptors for additional time, and the human using them gets both a high and a low afterwards. A real copy of a natural chemical such as Endorphin alpha would affect those centers normally associated with feeling good, but would it throw off the metabolism in the same way that heroin, for example, does? Part of drug addiction is the negative half of the reinforcement cycle, where you take the drug again to overcome the down that it puts you in when the first dose wears off.
Beautiful answer, but it raises a new question.
Isn't voteing one of the last places we want self modifying executables? I doubt anyone used them in Dibold code, but the very idea should be only a tad less scary than self modifying code at Iron Mountain/NORAD.
Most/.ers are not catching this implication. If the case eventually comes out as it looks to us to be coming out, then the SEC has fallen down on the job again, and private organizations such as the Motley Fool have been months behind the times, at best. You ask, how can you be sure you're not funding some con artist? The evidence tends more and more twards you must be. It's too easy for more crooks not to be taking advantage of it. The longer this SCO mess goes on without 'responsible' parties doing their jobs, and the more obvious the problem seems to use without those 'responsible' parties even noticing it, the more it implies there are huge 'corrections' still waiting in the stock market, huge numbers of people whose pension funds have been looted without them yet knowing, and equally huge numbers of people who need fired for not doing their jobs.
Fraid so. H P Lovecraft, Leigh Brackett, Sam Moskowitz and various other established SF or Fantasy authors all wrote one chapter each of a round robin novel called "The Shadow out of Space" (or something like that), and the semi-soft-core-porn novel "Naked came the Stranger" was written by no less than 24 people if memory serves (Including chapters by Phillip Roth and some other major literary authors). That's two. There are probably others. How about "Creativity is seldom a team sport"? Oh, and fiction novel is redundant, whereas non-fiction novel is an oxymoron.
It's a win/win situation. If the judge is anywhere close to objectively fair, SCO will lose (and by objectively fair, I mean only that the judge has read up enough on 9th amendment decisions and related decisions about where a right reverts to if it no longer belongs to the entity claiming it, to not be totally clueless). If the judge is biased towards large established firms, SCO loses. Even if the judge is somehow biased in the "Free software? Sounds like communism!", mode, those nice people in the blue suits are going to quickly assure him that IBM is part of the American Way. This case will come out the same way whether the judicial system is honest or crooked as a shave tail terrier's left hind leg after running into rush hour traffic.
Why the tags? All too many people think capitalism requires everyone be in the game for profit, and that no one has a right not to play, or to play for any different goals. This is precisely why some people think Microsoft put SCO up to this. It's been said quite often that no one can beat Microsoft if they let MS set the rules of engagement. SCO's actions look more and more like an attempt to force everyone to play every game of the series in Steve Balmer Stadium. When the first SCO stories broke, I didn't particularly buy the claim that MS was behind it all, but with subsequent revelations, the line SCO is trying to drive other firms and innovative individuals across looks more and more like the exact same line Microsoft wishes every competitor would stay inside.
Better would be the "one word" tooltip, in the way Harlan Ellison described it. That one word or short phrase that explains what you could't quite put your finger on. Like standard tooltips would show you the name of a car's engine when you looked at it, but "lemon" might actually be more useful, or better yet "Violates state's lemon law". One of Ellison's examples was words like "diabetic", which are handy when you meet an old high school friend and remember that she used to have to be excused to use the restroom a lot and you always wondered why. Of course, this sort of tooltip raises some pretty serious privacy issues. One real world tooltip like this is Fetal Alcohol Syndrome. Look at 50 to 100 or so pictures of people from all walks of life and age groups who have it, and your built in primate face recognition software will abstract what they have in common, and from then on, the phrase will pop up every time you see someone with it.
Plastics are already dividing into two kinds, and the pressure will increase as base oil prices go up.
First, there are very cheap plastics made from non-oil sources such as corn. Many of these are designed for a single use, and bio-degrade easily when wet, like some grocery store bags now do. Second, there are expensive, but very durable plastics, such as delrin or ABS. These will continue to be used in products that are expected to last many years (like kitchen countertops, or at least car bumpers), and will be made long after oil becomes too rare for making gasoline. The plastics in the middle will become extinct. What this does to an application such as diapers, where its got to be cheap enough for one use only, but can't break down quickly from getting wet, is where the plastics industry will be most in turmoil.
Since it was a psychologist telling experimental subjects the story about meeting Bugs at Disneyland, not Disney corp., why would their real ads need to change? They didn't show any ads with Bugs, in the first place. Second, her research shows that some people trust profesional people such as Pshrinks enough to relax their guard if carefully prompted to enter a relaxed suggestive state, not that they trust advertisers that much. Second, it still only worked on about 30% of people. I'm remembering it for the next time I'm on a jury, that there is up to a 30% chance the eye witness is one of those people who can easily be implanted with false memories, and the investigating officers probably asked leading questions, but that still means there's about 7 out of 10 of us who have more self posession than that.
Not everything is a slippery slope. Yes this has some potential. Like if larger capacity chips keep spreading through general manufacturing and the average black box becomes a design that retains an hour's data instead of 5 seconds, and some programming changes are made to retain peak data instead of just most recently obtained data and judges start issueing court orders without a major crash, or allow searching the data without a court order at all, it would be a problem. On the other hand, that's a chain with several ands and no ors. A successful class action lawsuit prohibiting manufacturers from retaining more data than needed to improve airbag safety, a good general policy on when court orders are appropriate, or laws much like the one congress just passed that prohibits insurance companies discriminating on the basis of genetic tests (and presumably getting the results of those tests from doctors), and the black boxes never slide down that slippery slope.
If I'm on your jury, it looks like there is more evidence against you than without it, but much less than if the other car has a black box too and both of them support his story against yours. The scenario you're describing might happen if other factors are also included, such as - you die in the collision and can't make the point that his car doesn't have a data record, or as - you can't find any eye witnesses, the cops didn't measure skid marks, and so on. Court cases don't happen in a vacuum (until the ISS has a judge on board).
First, I am not a lawyer. This comment represents a lay person's opinion only. - The USA has a lot of laws relating to conspiracy. An action taken to prevent recording data, before any other crime is comitted, might not be obstruction, because in some jurisdictions at least, obstruction has to happen after the investigation starts, but it can still fall under a catagory of conspiracy to commit this or that. A zealous DA might even claim it was evidence of premeditation for the other crimes. For fatalities, proving premeditation might even be enough to convert simple negligent manslaughter into actual capital case murder.
I've got a big old steel desk (WW 2 Government Surplus - 400 lbs. - built like a studebaker) supporting my desktop Tower PC, a couple of 20" monitors, and lots of peripherals. I think my next project will be fitting a couple of these puppies and some lightweight storage and networking gear into the space between the backs of the drawers and the desk's back. Replacing half this stuff might lighten the whole array enough that the floor lasts a few more years. It's creaking I tell you. Creaking.
You don't have to worry about one of these kids becoming president. By the time its all in place, kids going to public schools will have zero chance of rising above low-level management. Presidents will again be the oldest male descendant of the last president for life, as ghod intended.
If you are untrained as an attorney, the judge will often bend over backwards to make sure you get a fair chance. After all, if you lose, you can still get an attorney for an appeal, and then the judge's decisions will be scrutinized much more closely. It's not like acting as your own lawyer once means you have to keep doing it. Two caveats - 1. I am not an attorney, and this is not professional advice. 2. This applies more to criminal cases than civil ones.
At this point, judges who weren't formerly practicing lawyers are becoming increasingly rare in the USA. It used to be (up till about 1950) fairly common that people were appointed judges and then given training in the law as needed. Often they were 'warned' that they were being considered for a judgeship and given a chance to bone up on the law in advance. Supposedly, they were selected for generally above average common sense and moral virtue. Pragmatically, it was sometimes a reward for political cronyism. What's surprising is that bribery, obviously bad decisions, and abuses of power were apparently no more common under that system than today, possibly less so.
Worldwide, in the last few years, I have seen several estimations on how many species wait to be discovered, prepared by various organizations of Taxonomists, Biologists, and such. These are always much larger than the general public expects. There are probably no more than a few large mammals, at very most, awaiting discovery, but there may be 100,000 species of insects not yet categorized, and there are probably a thousand types of birds, hundreds of frogs and thousands of amphibians and reptiles, and possibly as many as a dozen rodents. It's even been proposed that there are still over 50 large (not bacteria sized) parasites on humans that have never been entered into a textbook. Overall, we may know as little as 15% of all species, and it appears dead certain the best possible number is less than 1/2. I'm not going to document all this in detail, but sites such as www.bottomquark.com have a few archived articles for those wanting to check the deplorable situation in taxonomy out.
You're describing the worst users out there. They will be the last to change to anything new, and without the resources of Microsoft, there's no point in trying. It takes too much effort to train 1 marginal user in Mozilla when you can train 4 or 5 good users and they will spread the program by word of mouth. Instead, reach out to the above average user, or the "above above average". If Mozilla currently has about 1% of the market, target the top 20 % or so - aim it at people who already count as power users. If it ever gets 6 or 8% market share, then broaden your aim to the top 50% of users. And remeber, business users also have a bottom 50%.
If you're right, the law thus creates two situations out of one. There are the old, real world impact risks from installing software that compromises your privacy, and the new, legal impact only risks that only happen when there becomes a legal record you did so. This is about as sensable as taking guns away from expert marksmen and handing out free guns to lousy shots, and saying it will somehow deter homicides.
Logic?
I once installed a 98 patch for an IE vulenerability that broke the TweakUI settings that in turn turned off the little shortcut arrow overlay. The last batch of IE patches I installed replaced a hacked version of solitare's resource file I was running with either a new one or the original. (They look identical, so probably no one who hasn't changed the card back graphics ever noticed this) What was in solitare that counted as an IE security vulnerability?
Slashdot Mirror
Medically, some forms of injury, such as spinal cord damage and that percent of ballistic injuries where the bullet lodges in bone rather than passing entirely through the victim seem to be more accurately related to Jerk than to other measurements or derivations, such as G's acceleration or projectile KE. It may also apply to 'whiplash' injuries and just possibly how varying high accelerations cause nausea.
Somewhat, but there's also a physical constraint. Drugs usually emulate natural substances in the body for example, its amazing how much the opiates pass through the same paths as natural endorphins, or LSD 's breakdown prducts resemble natural Serotonin inhibiters. But all these types hit a point in the metabolic processes where the natural enzymes don't break them down further at the normal rates. Generally, they plug up receptors for additional time, and the human using them gets both a high and a low afterwards. A real copy of a natural chemical such as Endorphin alpha would affect those centers normally associated with feeling good, but would it throw off the metabolism in the same way that heroin, for example, does? Part of drug addiction is the negative half of the reinforcement cycle, where you take the drug again to overcome the down that it puts you in when the first dose wears off.
And people would form long lines in front of the teal one, while ignoring the grape machine.
Beautiful answer, but it raises a new question. Isn't voteing one of the last places we want self modifying executables? I doubt anyone used them in Dibold code, but the very idea should be only a tad less scary than self modifying code at Iron Mountain/NORAD.
Most /.ers are not catching this implication. If the case eventually comes out as it looks to us to be coming out, then the SEC has fallen down on the job again, and private organizations such as the Motley Fool have been months behind the times, at best. You ask, how can you be sure you're not funding some con artist? The evidence tends more and more twards you must be. It's too easy for more crooks not to be taking advantage of it. The longer this SCO mess goes on without 'responsible' parties doing their jobs, and the more obvious the problem seems to use without those 'responsible' parties even noticing it, the more it implies there are huge 'corrections' still waiting in the stock market, huge numbers of people whose pension funds have been looted without them yet knowing, and equally huge numbers of people who need fired for not doing their jobs.
Fraid so. H P Lovecraft, Leigh Brackett, Sam Moskowitz and various other established SF or Fantasy authors all wrote one chapter each of a round robin novel called "The Shadow out of Space" (or something like that), and the semi-soft-core-porn novel "Naked came the Stranger" was written by no less than 24 people if memory serves (Including chapters by Phillip Roth and some other major literary authors). That's two. There are probably others. How about "Creativity is seldom a team sport"? Oh, and fiction novel is redundant, whereas non-fiction novel is an oxymoron.
It's a win/win situation. If the judge is anywhere close to objectively fair, SCO will lose (and by objectively fair, I mean only that the judge has read up enough on 9th amendment decisions and related decisions about where a right reverts to if it no longer belongs to the entity claiming it, to not be totally clueless). If the judge is biased towards large established firms, SCO loses. Even if the judge is somehow biased in the "Free software? Sounds like communism!", mode, those nice people in the blue suits are going to quickly assure him that IBM is part of the American Way. This case will come out the same way whether the judicial system is honest or crooked as a shave tail terrier's left hind leg after running into rush hour traffic.
Why the tags? All too many people think capitalism requires everyone be in the game for profit, and that no one has a right not to play, or to play for any different goals. This is precisely why some people think Microsoft put SCO up to this. It's been said quite often that no one can beat Microsoft if they let MS set the rules of engagement. SCO's actions look more and more like an attempt to force everyone to play every game of the series in Steve Balmer Stadium. When the first SCO stories broke, I didn't particularly buy the claim that MS was behind it all, but with subsequent revelations, the line SCO is trying to drive other firms and innovative individuals across looks more and more like the exact same line Microsoft wishes every competitor would stay inside.
Amen, Brother!
Better would be the "one word" tooltip, in the way Harlan Ellison described it. That one word or short phrase that explains what you could't quite put your finger on. Like standard tooltips would show you the name of a car's engine when you looked at it, but "lemon" might actually be more useful, or better yet "Violates state's lemon law". One of Ellison's examples was words like "diabetic", which are handy when you meet an old high school friend and remember that she used to have to be excused to use the restroom a lot and you always wondered why. Of course, this sort of tooltip raises some pretty serious privacy issues. One real world tooltip like this is Fetal Alcohol Syndrome. Look at 50 to 100 or so pictures of people from all walks of life and age groups who have it, and your built in primate face recognition software will abstract what they have in common, and from then on, the phrase will pop up every time you see someone with it.
Plastics are already dividing into two kinds, and the pressure will increase as base oil prices go up. First, there are very cheap plastics made from non-oil sources such as corn. Many of these are designed for a single use, and bio-degrade easily when wet, like some grocery store bags now do. Second, there are expensive, but very durable plastics, such as delrin or ABS. These will continue to be used in products that are expected to last many years (like kitchen countertops, or at least car bumpers), and will be made long after oil becomes too rare for making gasoline. The plastics in the middle will become extinct. What this does to an application such as diapers, where its got to be cheap enough for one use only, but can't break down quickly from getting wet, is where the plastics industry will be most in turmoil.
Since it was a psychologist telling experimental subjects the story about meeting Bugs at Disneyland, not Disney corp., why would their real ads need to change? They didn't show any ads with Bugs, in the first place. Second, her research shows that some people trust profesional people such as Pshrinks enough to relax their guard if carefully prompted to enter a relaxed suggestive state, not that they trust advertisers that much. Second, it still only worked on about 30% of people. I'm remembering it for the next time I'm on a jury, that there is up to a 30% chance the eye witness is one of those people who can easily be implanted with false memories, and the investigating officers probably asked leading questions, but that still means there's about 7 out of 10 of us who have more self posession than that.
Whoops, I left an "or" in that chain. Still, that's a minimum of 3 conditions that have to all happen in order, so I hope the point is still clear.
Not everything is a slippery slope. Yes this has some potential. Like if larger capacity chips keep spreading through general manufacturing and the average black box becomes a design that retains an hour's data instead of 5 seconds, and some programming changes are made to retain peak data instead of just most recently obtained data and judges start issueing court orders without a major crash, or allow searching the data without a court order at all, it would be a problem. On the other hand, that's a chain with several ands and no ors. A successful class action lawsuit prohibiting manufacturers from retaining more data than needed to improve airbag safety, a good general policy on when court orders are appropriate, or laws much like the one congress just passed that prohibits insurance companies discriminating on the basis of genetic tests (and presumably getting the results of those tests from doctors), and the black boxes never slide down that slippery slope.
If I'm on your jury, it looks like there is more evidence against you than without it, but much less than if the other car has a black box too and both of them support his story against yours. The scenario you're describing might happen if other factors are also included, such as - you die in the collision and can't make the point that his car doesn't have a data record, or as - you can't find any eye witnesses, the cops didn't measure skid marks, and so on. Court cases don't happen in a vacuum (until the ISS has a judge on board).
First, I am not a lawyer. This comment represents a lay person's opinion only. - The USA has a lot of laws relating to conspiracy. An action taken to prevent recording data, before any other crime is comitted, might not be obstruction, because in some jurisdictions at least, obstruction has to happen after the investigation starts, but it can still fall under a catagory of conspiracy to commit this or that. A zealous DA might even claim it was evidence of premeditation for the other crimes. For fatalities, proving premeditation might even be enough to convert simple negligent manslaughter into actual capital case murder.
I've got a big old steel desk (WW 2 Government Surplus - 400 lbs. - built like a studebaker) supporting my desktop Tower PC, a couple of 20" monitors, and lots of peripherals. I think my next project will be fitting a couple of these puppies and some lightweight storage and networking gear into the space between the backs of the drawers and the desk's back. Replacing half this stuff might lighten the whole array enough that the floor lasts a few more years. It's creaking I tell you. Creaking.
You don't have to worry about one of these kids becoming president. By the time its all in place, kids going to public schools will have zero chance of rising above low-level management. Presidents will again be the oldest male descendant of the last president for life, as ghod intended.
Merry Birthday to You, Merry Birthday to You, May all Your Fine Dreams and Good Wishes Come True! - Mike Jitlov
If you are untrained as an attorney, the judge will often bend over backwards to make sure you get a fair chance. After all, if you lose, you can still get an attorney for an appeal, and then the judge's decisions will be scrutinized much more closely. It's not like acting as your own lawyer once means you have to keep doing it. Two caveats - 1. I am not an attorney, and this is not professional advice. 2. This applies more to criminal cases than civil ones.
At this point, judges who weren't formerly practicing lawyers are becoming increasingly rare in the USA. It used to be (up till about 1950) fairly common that people were appointed judges and then given training in the law as needed. Often they were 'warned' that they were being considered for a judgeship and given a chance to bone up on the law in advance. Supposedly, they were selected for generally above average common sense and moral virtue. Pragmatically, it was sometimes a reward for political cronyism. What's surprising is that bribery, obviously bad decisions, and abuses of power were apparently no more common under that system than today, possibly less so.
Worldwide, in the last few years, I have seen several estimations on how many species wait to be discovered, prepared by various organizations of Taxonomists, Biologists, and such. These are always much larger than the general public expects. There are probably no more than a few large mammals, at very most, awaiting discovery, but there may be 100,000 species of insects not yet categorized, and there are probably a thousand types of birds, hundreds of frogs and thousands of amphibians and reptiles, and possibly as many as a dozen rodents. It's even been proposed that there are still over 50 large (not bacteria sized) parasites on humans that have never been entered into a textbook. Overall, we may know as little as 15% of all species, and it appears dead certain the best possible number is less than 1/2. I'm not going to document all this in detail, but sites such as www.bottomquark.com have a few archived articles for those wanting to check the deplorable situation in taxonomy out.
You're describing the worst users out there. They will be the last to change to anything new, and without the resources of Microsoft, there's no point in trying. It takes too much effort to train 1 marginal user in Mozilla when you can train 4 or 5 good users and they will spread the program by word of mouth. Instead, reach out to the above average user, or the "above above average". If Mozilla currently has about 1% of the market, target the top 20 % or so - aim it at people who already count as power users. If it ever gets 6 or 8% market share, then broaden your aim to the top 50% of users. And remeber, business users also have a bottom 50%.
If you're right, the law thus creates two situations out of one. There are the old, real world impact risks from installing software that compromises your privacy, and the new, legal impact only risks that only happen when there becomes a legal record you did so. This is about as sensable as taking guns away from expert marksmen and handing out free guns to lousy shots, and saying it will somehow deter homicides.
Logic? I once installed a 98 patch for an IE vulenerability that broke the TweakUI settings that in turn turned off the little shortcut arrow overlay. The last batch of IE patches I installed replaced a hacked version of solitare's resource file I was running with either a new one or the original. (They look identical, so probably no one who hasn't changed the card back graphics ever noticed this) What was in solitare that counted as an IE security vulnerability?