Also, a car-sized aircraft with one or two passengers would be light enough to deploy one of these, significantly increasing the suitability of the available terrain.
Also, the Arizonan Sheriff's youtube videos suggest that said sheriff is ignorant of various edge filters, like, for instance, unsharp mask, which might have been performed on the image prior to the layering.
On the other hand, it was pretty stupid to do any kind of processing, automatic or otherwise, on the scanned image. They should've just scanned it into a bitmap and distributed it as an LZW compressed TIFF, and avoided the question altogether.
It's almost as if they were hoping for a repeat of the 2008 election where it served as a fairly effective rope-a-dope.
All the third party candidates I'm aware of have either been buried or subject to such smear campaigns I can't tell if they're raving lunatics or not. You're the well informed one here, and I am just a stupid slave after all. Please, help me save me from myself.
The third party candidates have websites, you know. Can you not read what they claim they want and evaluate for yourself how crazy it sounds?
No, they should keep the ideology, and ditch the party-blindness.
What we really need is more gridlock. If they can pass laws unfettered, they will spam us with so many laws (some good, perhaps, by inverse sturgeon's law), that we won't know where to begin to try and roll back the tyranny.
In fact, I think a lot of idealistic slashdotters would like to see rollback of a lot of the laws we already have, though there is probably some division as to precisely which ones (I suspect we'd be better of with the union of those lists than the intersection, though...).
Usually because in those old cartoons, after the soot gag the character's behavior changes to mimic, without irony, the actions of characters in minstrel shows, which used blackface to propagate racist stereotypes.
Also, the pattern of the soot also recalls those minstrel shows. Tell me this isn't insulting.
There is no technical reason why apple must hold any keys which would be sufficient for apple itself to decrypt the data. I'm sure that allowing a user to access data from a hosting service without ever divulging enough information to the hosting service provider for the provider to decrypt the data is either a solved problem, or at least has well-known, robust solutions which are unlikely to be implemented by any large commercial service(*)
(*) Also, I suspect that whatever they did choose, it's still at least an order of magnitude more secure and less bullshitty than what the banks are doing.
The practicality and effectiveness of any scheme undertaken to secure personal data held in trust appears to be roughly inversely proportional to the value of that data.....
Parent is not comparing to the Nook SimpleTouch or the Kindle Touch. The comparison is being made to the Nook Color 2 and Kindle Fire tablets. If they come in at $150, it won't be because they're matching the ePaper book readers (that's about 2x too much for the base models, anyway...), it'll be because they're undercutting the tablets.
Which is something I doubt Apple would do. When was the last time Apple entered an already established market with a device at the low end?
My mechanic always explains what's wrong with my car when a decision needs to be made, and what was done when I pick it up. Is he being paternalistic, or giving me good service?
Although it's a good idea to get this information from your mechanic, the raw data is not exclusively available only through mechanics. There is a standard interface to obtain the data - OBDII, which I think is kind of the opposite of the point you were trying to make....
In this case, it's more of a, "If you have nothing to hide, then why are you making me worry?" The medical device company might not need to worry about a lawsuit (if the data is hidden, only they can know if they need to worry), but the medical device bearer might prefer to catch something early rather than let his family obtain the data through the discovery process in an unlawful death suit....
I get why two-step authorization might not be clinically desirable, but why does it need to use the same key for encrypting the output that it uses for decrypting the input, other than to provide an excuse not to allow the patient to see his own info?
The patient, btw, has the greatest personal investment in a positive outcome, and while it's certainly plausible that they are not and will not study medicine and become a doctor, most people can afford to invest the time to become experts or near-experts in a narrow enough field - like the specific operation of the medical device implanted in their own bodies. Certainly enough to be able to say, "woah, that looks like something I should go see a doctor about right away."
Doctors are supposed to be knowledgable people who can interpret results and come to reasonable conclusions. Not opaque oracles pronouncing their decrees from on-high.
If that's the case, then the patient may want to have the device removed sooner, rather than later. What's to stop someone with malicious intent from deliberately sending commands that would interfere with his heart's normal operation, instead of correcting abnormal behavior?
Hell.. if their checksums are as good as their encryption, what's to stop random EM fluctuations from happening to trigger an undesired command?
The thing is, I kind of want there to be one company doing this, or better, offering it as a settable option, though. So that I can reduce the unpaid, frustrating, familial support calls.
I don't like that all companies want to do this because they are attracted by the rent-seeking opportunities, but I rather like the idea of a machine which makes it difficult for people with poor click discipline to fuzz things up.
Are you sure it's really better? Are you sure they haven't just figured out how to hide the important stuff by burying it under a mountain of the mundane?
Look at Facebook; It went from an amazingly simple and useful website to a horribly bloated content platform that most of its users' dislike but can't quit it because all their friends are on it...
Nice try, but facebook was born evil. For intance, they have never made it simple to opt out of stuff. One of the early complaints was that if you opted out of a feature and weren't diligent, you'd find you were opted back in the next time facebook updated anything.
Facebook has always been evil, and they're proud of it, to the point of shouting it from the rooftops by making a movie. The only thing that's changed is that a few people, maybe, are starting to catch on.
Square seems to be going for the paypal market - being a middle-man between the credit card companies and the merchants.
Just like with paypal, I cannoth fathom why the credit card companies would allow this to go on without offering a similar service themselves, and I also cannot understand how it could possibly be anything but more expensive per transaction for the merchant.
The pay-by-phone tech that I would be interested in is this:
Merchant requests a payment token from my phone via a low-power short-range communication protocol (bluetooth, perhaps, though I'm not sure how to speed up the discovery so it requests payment from the right device), and I review the request on my on phone, which itself contacts the cc processor to obtain a unique token for this transaction to give to the merchant.
For convenience, I would like to have settings to specify what kind of authentication is required for various sized transactions, a daily cutoff that bumps up the authentication requirement, and per-merchant settings to bump up or down the requirements. Perhaps with the ability to pre-authorize certain merchants for authentication-free transactions for certain amounts during a certain time-window - e.g. the morning coffee mentioned above.
Slashdot Mirror
By the time you have the dough to commute by helicopter... people come to you, instead...
Also, a car-sized aircraft with one or two passengers would be light enough to deploy one of these, significantly increasing the suitability of the available terrain.
I think it was actually a ripoff of Totally Hidden Video, which was a ripoff of Candid Camera...
Keep the touch screens, ditch the driving
Also, the Arizonan Sheriff's youtube videos suggest that said sheriff is ignorant of various edge filters, like, for instance, unsharp mask, which might have been performed on the image prior to the layering.
On the other hand, it was pretty stupid to do any kind of processing, automatic or otherwise, on the scanned image. They should've just scanned it into a bitmap and distributed it as an LZW compressed TIFF, and avoided the question altogether.
It's almost as if they were hoping for a repeat of the 2008 election where it served as a fairly effective rope-a-dope.
All the third party candidates I'm aware of have either been buried or subject to such smear campaigns I can't tell if they're raving lunatics or not. You're the well informed one here, and I am just a stupid slave after all. Please, help me save me from myself.
The third party candidates have websites, you know. Can you not read what they claim they want and evaluate for yourself how crazy it sounds?
No, they should keep the ideology, and ditch the party-blindness.
What we really need is more gridlock. If they can pass laws unfettered, they will spam us with so many laws (some good, perhaps, by inverse sturgeon's law), that we won't know where to begin to try and roll back the tyranny.
In fact, I think a lot of idealistic slashdotters would like to see rollback of a lot of the laws we already have, though there is probably some division as to precisely which ones (I suspect we'd be better of with the union of those lists than the intersection, though...).
Usually because in those old cartoons, after the soot gag the character's behavior changes to mimic, without irony, the actions of characters in minstrel shows, which used blackface to propagate racist stereotypes.
Also, the pattern of the soot also recalls those minstrel shows. Tell me this isn't insulting.
A cost-effective technique for brute-forcing any password.
There is no technical reason why apple must hold any keys which would be sufficient for apple itself to decrypt the data. I'm sure that allowing a user to access data from a hosting service without ever divulging enough information to the hosting service provider for the provider to decrypt the data is either a solved problem, or at least has well-known, robust solutions which are unlikely to be implemented by any large commercial service(*)
(*) Also, I suspect that whatever they did choose, it's still at least an order of magnitude more secure and less bullshitty than what the banks are doing.
The practicality and effectiveness of any scheme undertaken to secure personal data held in trust appears to be roughly inversely proportional to the value of that data.....
So did everyone who leveraged up to buy a big house...
But that's the thing, isn't it. The extra credit was boosting house prices.... They were leveraging up to buy the same size house for more money.
This is the "Microsoft Surface" I remember: Future of Computing. When did it change to being a tablet?
Parent is not comparing to the Nook SimpleTouch or the Kindle Touch. The comparison is being made to the Nook Color 2 and Kindle Fire tablets. If they come in at $150, it won't be because they're matching the ePaper book readers (that's about 2x too much for the base models, anyway...), it'll be because they're undercutting the tablets.
Which is something I doubt Apple would do. When was the last time Apple entered an already established market with a device at the low end?
I was going to say slouching, but then I noticed that all the articles I found appear to be by the same guy, and he's a chiropractor!
google scholar link
My mechanic always explains what's wrong with my car when a decision needs to be made, and what was done when I pick it up. Is he being paternalistic, or giving me good service?
Although it's a good idea to get this information from your mechanic, the raw data is not exclusively available only through mechanics. There is a standard interface to obtain the data - OBDII, which I think is kind of the opposite of the point you were trying to make....
In this case, it's more of a, "If you have nothing to hide, then why are you making me worry?" The medical device company might not need to worry about a lawsuit (if the data is hidden, only they can know if they need to worry), but the medical device bearer might prefer to catch something early rather than let his family obtain the data through the discovery process in an unlawful death suit....
I get why two-step authorization might not be clinically desirable, but why does it need to use the same key for encrypting the output that it uses for decrypting the input, other than to provide an excuse not to allow the patient to see his own info?
The patient, btw, has the greatest personal investment in a positive outcome, and while it's certainly plausible that they are not and will not study medicine and become a doctor, most people can afford to invest the time to become experts or near-experts in a narrow enough field - like the specific operation of the medical device implanted in their own bodies. Certainly enough to be able to say, "woah, that looks like something I should go see a doctor about right away."
Doctors are supposed to be knowledgable people who can interpret results and come to reasonable conclusions. Not opaque oracles pronouncing their decrees from on-high.
If that's the case, then the patient may want to have the device removed sooner, rather than later. What's to stop someone with malicious intent from deliberately sending commands that would interfere with his heart's normal operation, instead of correcting abnormal behavior?
Hell.. if their checksums are as good as their encryption, what's to stop random EM fluctuations from happening to trigger an undesired command?
We can and certainly do observe the surface of venus under the cloud cover. Using satellite and interplanetary radar.
Volcanoes on Venus are an especially interesting feature - lava domes.
They made you change your posture to the worst possible posture for spine health, and you thanked them for it?
The thing is, I kind of want there to be one company doing this, or better, offering it as a settable option, though. So that I can reduce the unpaid, frustrating, familial support calls.
I don't like that all companies want to do this because they are attracted by the rent-seeking opportunities, but I rather like the idea of a machine which makes it difficult for people with poor click discipline to fuzz things up.
Are you sure it's really better? Are you sure they haven't just figured out how to hide the important stuff by burying it under a mountain of the mundane?
Look at Facebook; It went from an amazingly simple and useful website to a horribly bloated content platform that most of its users' dislike but can't quit it because all their friends are on it...
Nice try, but facebook was born evil. For intance, they have never made it simple to opt out of stuff. One of the early complaints was that if you opted out of a feature and weren't diligent, you'd find you were opted back in the next time facebook updated anything.
Facebook has always been evil, and they're proud of it, to the point of shouting it from the rooftops by making a movie. The only thing that's changed is that a few people, maybe, are starting to catch on.
Astronomers use cgs for some reason, so you're both wrong...
My yikes was a different one.
Square seems to be going for the paypal market - being a middle-man between the credit card companies and the merchants.
Just like with paypal, I cannoth fathom why the credit card companies would allow this to go on without offering a similar service themselves, and I also cannot understand how it could possibly be anything but more expensive per transaction for the merchant.
The pay-by-phone tech that I would be interested in is this:
Merchant requests a payment token from my phone via a low-power short-range communication protocol (bluetooth, perhaps, though I'm not sure how to speed up the discovery so it requests payment from the right device), and I review the request on my on phone, which itself contacts the cc processor to obtain a unique token for this transaction to give to the merchant.
For convenience, I would like to have settings to specify what kind of authentication is required for various sized transactions, a daily cutoff that bumps up the authentication requirement, and per-merchant settings to bump up or down the requirements. Perhaps with the ability to pre-authorize certain merchants for authentication-free transactions for certain amounts during a certain time-window - e.g. the morning coffee mentioned above.