Going just a bit next level, doesn't the way NX violations will be handled (exception/fault/or whatever you wanna call it) create an ideal opportunity for a DoS attack?
I don't understand. Wikipedia and Google are cool and everything... but what about Slashdot??
Don't mean to troll, but I just read off the "X of Y comments" section under each headline on the/. homepage: 76, 182, 184, 186, 155, 547, 233, 908, 254, 317.
This totals 3042 posts. If you think that/. deserves attention for an award, you would need more popularity to even get a bare nomination. Slashdot is too "insignificant" in terms of proportional utility to the public population.
Sorry, but I simply counted the numbers and anyone with a bit of reason would conclude too that 3k posts is like a moderately popular discussion forum of a pop star fan site... That's just not enough to get into a ballpark for an award like the Webby Award.
Last I checked, coal is a hell of a lot dirtier than gasoline, which, contrary to popular belief, is one of the cleaner fossil fuels we have, and probably will be for a long time.
And what about categories? In Windows you have to add them to the registry
Please be so kind and back your statement with some reference to a KB article or something saying that there is a problem and that the only way to add categories is by editing registry!
I never have to touch registry when editing contact categories. Or we might be talking about two different things and you haven't even cared to be more specific.
I am no expert in this technology, but I am somewhat knowledgable about it, let me explain something.
You won't understand how hard is it to actually pull off something like face recognition until you yourself actually sit down and try it, only to realize that the problem is much more complex to solve when it has to be so all-encompasing.
The first step to face recognition is to recognize where the face is. The result of this process are quadrilaterals that carve out the face so that when you crop, you are left with exactly the face (frontal, or profile view or other).
A common technique used to do that is to locate the eyes. Most faces (heck, even those with veils on them for relegious reasons!) will contain eyes. Then, when detecting where the face is, you are only left with not having covered people who are wearing sunglasses (which are much easier to detect).
After you have located the eyes, you gauge by their proportions the approximate proportions of the face. Then, you apply an iterative technique (varies in principle, typically based on differential calculus combined with numerical methods of approximation) to locate the bounds of the face so you can eventually crop it to know WHERE THE FACE IS.
"Obviously", the iterative technique has to be able to detect false positives via a threshold set that will rule out the non-face. However, once you have located the eyes with certain reliability, the overall chance that you have come across a face is pretty solid.
The problem is complicated as it is already as you can see!!
Only after FINDING the face, you can start MATCHING the face. At that point you are facing a number of problems that the imagination of most/.-ers can conceive of... Bierds, smiles, teeth-showing, frowns, skin tone changes and the most popular by all scientist: plastic surgery....
A common approach to the actual face matching is a technique of the so-called eigenfaces, whereby you compute a "common" face of the pool and then you can navigate down the specialization of characteristics (e.g. bigger, bigger, bigger nostrils) as you drill down, narrowing down the pool of possible faces.
There is nothing that takes away from how much state-of-the-art CMU's research is. It would be like saying "why is someone dealing with virtual memory management of an operating system if by now, we already have user applications for the OS". Do you see the flaw in such thinking?
The science behind is a lot of mathematics, so dear parent, please don't be ignorant of this type of work just because you don't understand its complexities...
You are right on the deficit, but the dollar is getting stronger (you can get more and more EUR for 1 USD).
A strong dollar however suggests that the U.S. economy is improving. This is happening only because the risk of the interest rates going up has been increasing over time with an expectation of the recovery. International trading balance and international investment overall can however be very vaguely disconnected from measuring the performance of an economy only by focusing on internal metrics. (Even though of course, with economies constantly becoming more global, that's slowly becoming an obsolete approach.)
Despite the dollar exchange rate suggesting an improving economy, he still did not prove why the U.S. economy doesn't suck right now or in the mid-term future.
Besides, a company losing 10% of its ~270 employees is less than the local fast food store going out of business...
Please state your sources every time you claim a fact!!!!
According to the RBoC stock coversion, SCO has a business presence in 82 countries with a network of 11,000 resellers and 4,000 developers. While the 11,000 resellers are solution providers, and their developers when dubbed developer network is listed as 8,000 in number, I haven't seen any actual "employees" numbers anywhere.
You use nothing more but a vague "good" to describe a well-performing economy. That's just pathetic.
Consumer debt load is at record high, including mortgage debt. According to the same source (USATODAY), "household debt levels rose nearly 11% in 2003" alone!!! This does not tell good things about household balance sheets. In fact, consumer debt levels reveal what the balance sheets wouldn't. In this case, they tell you how sh*t-fscked the Americans got, living today on money they will earn tomorrow for years now and it can't get better.
And when was the last time you checked the 2003 record-high $380 billion dollar deficit.
I am not opposing the fact that the economy doesn't suck. But you have not shown it and made close to zero effot (only concrete unemployment numbers)!! You have to know your facts and know what makes a good economy first.
I will conclude my point by reiterating the fundamentals. I said it once, I'll say it fscking again: State your sources!!!
Yes, I misspelled one word in there. So be it, just more to the point of what I was saying. We are no better then the rest of the planet, spelling errors included.
For this monstrous calamity of an offense, I trust that my trial on charges of treason to the sacred cow of national superiority will be short and execution swift and merciful.
Why the fuck does this guy get modded down as flaimbait.... Did he spit shit on that guy who shoved a spelling mistake in his face? No.
To any other fucker with mod points, read it over before you do something... Otherwise this will be another perfect example of why/. is bound only to continue loosing its attraction as time passes.
To add one more point, I must say you failed to understand the entire purpose of DRM.
It is a tool so that the media industry does not have to fight p2p, but instead to slowly switch everyone away from it (to their DRM-based channels that one has to pay for, but eventually they are planned to achieve such momentum that even the last Joe Sixpacks will say "awgh man, this p2p thing sucks, there is noone anymore sharing what i want" and all that will be left on p2p are underground home garage and other bands sharing their collections for free).
Whether you like it or not, DRM is designed to render p2p useless because everyone will switch away. They will lure people with bullshit fancy shiny boxes, software that they will call "cool" and "easy" and overwhelm the market with their market presence (Dell is the largest desktop pc distributor and even small and medium businesses buy from them for their offices). The prices they will charge will be low enough for people to deal with, but eventually it's like in that commercial: " 'We saved a nickel on a transaction.' Boss replies: 'Hmm.. we do twenty million transactions a day....'".
Basically DRM chokes off distibution networks for media product, especially when it gets legally mandated into consumer electronics.
DRM consolidates distribution channels to achieve CONTROL.
Instead of uncontrollable links between people (between "peers"), this establishes a tree-like structure of control. Of course it costs money in research and in partnership deals, but the returns of such consolidation must have been much better calculated by the people who are pushing to implement it than you have conceived of when making your/. post.
The media companies should be researching an 'anti-DRM' instead of DRM. They should be trying to come up with new ways to get people to copy and share media product on their PCs instead of trying to stop people from doing this.
I hate this typical Slashdot mod-me-up whoring: they should, they should, they should...
Regardless of whether you are right or wrong in your "should" statement, at least include a "because" clause (if not actual references that justify a policy based on conducted observations or experiements).
Of course, nothing is "bullet-proof", I don't mean to troll here, but since you said your friend is involved, I think that choosing a friend to have that access is counterproductive. The person being your friend means most likely that there is an increased likelihood that you might die together. Say friends go camping, or whatever, just a plain car accident. If you die by accident and one of your friends dies as well, it could be the friend who has the access for your company.
I guess you chose a friend to cut cost. But why don't you ask your employer to get a safety deposit box. They cost close to nothing. And an employer might also have a good impression if you suggest that, a deposit box would look like a truly professional by-the-books way to go.
Re:More information -err, no way on those salaries
on
Google Files for IPO
·
· Score: 1
My.02 worth of/. flaimbait: Your moronity most likely stems from the lack of education about operations management. And yet you keep arguing.
While researching the case of Air Pirates, I stumbled upon this article. It only proves that case-by-case analysis is the only currently workable method of evaluation and that the subject is so complex and varied that it cannot be encompassed on short exchanges of messages such as ours here on Slashdot. The complexity is indeed frustrating...
You are contradicting yourself. On one hand you say that it is "impossible to make any blanket statement as to what is and is not fair use" and on the other hand you claim that you can check via a simple pass/fail evaluation of the four aspect fair use analysis (clearly showing that hyou misunderstood that the 4-point fair use analysis really results only in a guideline as to which side the fair use vs. not fair use balance MIGHT be tipped and not an ultimate decision).
But this is Slashdot, it's okay to contradict yourself...
The associate of AmEx forgot to pitch to you that even though they canceled disposable numbers, they added a true zero liability for fraud so that customers don't pay anything, not even the first $50 (as typical for other banks).
Slashdot Mirror
Going just a bit next level, doesn't the way NX violations will be handled (exception/fault/or whatever you wanna call it) create an ideal opportunity for a DoS attack?
Yeah, even though a bit off-topic, I'd like to know why is every other chunk of spectrum marked for aeronautical navigation or maritime mobile?
Source
Yakkety-yakk-yakk.
Karma whore...
Good boy! Goooood customer!
Don't mean to troll, but I just read off the "X of Y comments" section under each headline on the /. homepage: 76, 182, 184, 186, 155, 547, 233, 908, 254, 317.
This totals 3042 posts. If you think that /. deserves attention for an award, you would need more popularity to even get a bare nomination. Slashdot is too "insignificant" in terms of proportional utility to the public population.
Sorry, but I simply counted the numbers and anyone with a bit of reason would conclude too that 3k posts is like a moderately popular discussion forum of a pop star fan site... That's just not enough to get into a ballpark for an award like the Webby Award.
And you deserve a kick in the skull to sober up.
LMAO
When you say 'long time', do you mean like 'for less than 30 years'?
Hahaha! This is exactly the sentiment about OSS across the board by many: "If it doesn't make money, it means it will be open source."
For what? For the 3.2% (Apple's market share in '03)???
Give me a break...
Please be so kind and back your statement with some reference to a KB article or something saying that there is a problem and that the only way to add categories is by editing registry!
I never have to touch registry when editing contact categories. Or we might be talking about two different things and you haven't even cared to be more specific.
I am no expert in this technology, but I am somewhat knowledgable about it, let me explain something.
You won't understand how hard is it to actually pull off something like face recognition until you yourself actually sit down and try it, only to realize that the problem is much more complex to solve when it has to be so all-encompasing.
The first step to face recognition is to recognize where the face is. The result of this process are quadrilaterals that carve out the face so that when you crop, you are left with exactly the face (frontal, or profile view or other).
A common technique used to do that is to locate the eyes. Most faces (heck, even those with veils on them for relegious reasons!) will contain eyes. Then, when detecting where the face is, you are only left with not having covered people who are wearing sunglasses (which are much easier to detect).
After you have located the eyes, you gauge by their proportions the approximate proportions of the face. Then, you apply an iterative technique (varies in principle, typically based on differential calculus combined with numerical methods of approximation) to locate the bounds of the face so you can eventually crop it to know WHERE THE FACE IS.
"Obviously", the iterative technique has to be able to detect false positives via a threshold set that will rule out the non-face. However, once you have located the eyes with certain reliability, the overall chance that you have come across a face is pretty solid.
The problem is complicated as it is already as you can see!!
Only after FINDING the face, you can start MATCHING the face. At that point you are facing a number of problems that the imagination of most /.-ers can conceive of... Bierds, smiles, teeth-showing, frowns, skin tone changes and the most popular by all scientist: plastic surgery....
A common approach to the actual face matching is a technique of the so-called eigenfaces, whereby you compute a "common" face of the pool and then you can navigate down the specialization of characteristics (e.g. bigger, bigger, bigger nostrils) as you drill down, narrowing down the pool of possible faces.
There is nothing that takes away from how much state-of-the-art CMU's research is. It would be like saying "why is someone dealing with virtual memory management of an operating system if by now, we already have user applications for the OS". Do you see the flaw in such thinking?
The science behind is a lot of mathematics, so dear parent, please don't be ignorant of this type of work just because you don't understand its complexities...
Huh? I was the one using multiple consecutive !-s, but correctly outside of the quotes. I might have missed your point about USATODAY.
You are right on the deficit, but the dollar is getting stronger (you can get more and more EUR for 1 USD).
A strong dollar however suggests that the U.S. economy is improving. This is happening only because the risk of the interest rates going up has been increasing over time with an expectation of the recovery. International trading balance and international investment overall can however be very vaguely disconnected from measuring the performance of an economy only by focusing on internal metrics. (Even though of course, with economies constantly becoming more global, that's slowly becoming an obsolete approach.)
Despite the dollar exchange rate suggesting an improving economy, he still did not prove why the U.S. economy doesn't suck right now or in the mid-term future.
Please state your sources every time you claim a fact!!!!
According to the RBoC stock coversion, SCO has a business presence in 82 countries with a network of 11,000 resellers and 4,000 developers. While the 11,000 resellers are solution providers, and their developers when dubbed developer network is listed as 8,000 in number, I haven't seen any actual "employees" numbers anywhere.
You use nothing more but a vague "good" to describe a well-performing economy. That's just pathetic.
Consumer debt load is at record high, including mortgage debt. According to the same source (USATODAY), "household debt levels rose nearly 11% in 2003" alone!!! This does not tell good things about household balance sheets. In fact, consumer debt levels reveal what the balance sheets wouldn't. In this case, they tell you how sh*t-fscked the Americans got, living today on money they will earn tomorrow for years now and it can't get better.
And when was the last time you checked the 2003 record-high $380 billion dollar deficit.
I am not opposing the fact that the economy doesn't suck. But you have not shown it and made close to zero effot (only concrete unemployment numbers)!! You have to know your facts and know what makes a good economy first.
I will conclude my point by reiterating the fundamentals. I said it once, I'll say it fscking again: State your sources!!!
For this monstrous calamity of an offense, I trust that my trial on charges of treason to the sacred cow of national superiority will be short and execution swift and merciful.
Why the fuck does this guy get modded down as flaimbait.... Did he spit shit on that guy who shoved a spelling mistake in his face? No.
To any other fucker with mod points, read it over before you do something... Otherwise this will be another perfect example of why /. is bound only to continue loosing its attraction as time passes.
There is no tranny [...]
Geeesh, I was getting worried that she was a he...
To add one more point, I must say you failed to understand the entire purpose of DRM.
It is a tool so that the media industry does not have to fight p2p, but instead to slowly switch everyone away from it (to their DRM-based channels that one has to pay for, but eventually they are planned to achieve such momentum that even the last Joe Sixpacks will say "awgh man, this p2p thing sucks, there is noone anymore sharing what i want" and all that will be left on p2p are underground home garage and other bands sharing their collections for free).
Whether you like it or not, DRM is designed to render p2p useless because everyone will switch away. They will lure people with bullshit fancy shiny boxes, software that they will call "cool" and "easy" and overwhelm the market with their market presence (Dell is the largest desktop pc distributor and even small and medium businesses buy from them for their offices). The prices they will charge will be low enough for people to deal with, but eventually it's like in that commercial: " 'We saved a nickel on a transaction.' Boss replies: 'Hmm.. we do twenty million transactions a day....'".
Basically DRM chokes off distibution networks for media product, especially when it gets legally mandated into consumer electronics.
DRM consolidates distribution channels to achieve CONTROL.
Instead of uncontrollable links between people (between "peers"), this establishes a tree-like structure of control. Of course it costs money in research and in partnership deals, but the returns of such consolidation must have been much better calculated by the people who are pushing to implement it than you have conceived of when making your /. post.
I hate this typical Slashdot mod-me-up whoring: they should, they should, they should...
Regardless of whether you are right or wrong in your "should" statement, at least include a "because" clause (if not actual references that justify a policy based on conducted observations or experiements).
Of course, nothing is "bullet-proof", I don't mean to troll here, but since you said your friend is involved, I think that choosing a friend to have that access is counterproductive. The person being your friend means most likely that there is an increased likelihood that you might die together. Say friends go camping, or whatever, just a plain car accident. If you die by accident and one of your friends dies as well, it could be the friend who has the access for your company.
I guess you chose a friend to cut cost. But why don't you ask your employer to get a safety deposit box. They cost close to nothing. And an employer might also have a good impression if you suggest that, a deposit box would look like a truly professional by-the-books way to go.
My .02 worth of /. flaimbait: Your moronity most likely stems from the lack of education about operations management. And yet you keep arguing.
While researching the case of Air Pirates, I stumbled upon this article. It only proves that case-by-case analysis is the only currently workable method of evaluation and that the subject is so complex and varied that it cannot be encompassed on short exchanges of messages such as ours here on Slashdot. The complexity is indeed frustrating...
You are contradicting yourself. On one hand you say that it is "impossible to make any blanket statement as to what is and is not fair use" and on the other hand you claim that you can check via a simple pass/fail evaluation of the four aspect fair use analysis (clearly showing that hyou misunderstood that the 4-point fair use analysis really results only in a guideline as to which side the fair use vs. not fair use balance MIGHT be tipped and not an ultimate decision).
But this is Slashdot, it's okay to contradict yourself...
The associate of AmEx forgot to pitch to you that even though they canceled disposable numbers, they added a true zero liability for fraud so that customers don't pay anything, not even the first $50 (as typical for other banks).