Because there was a flood in turkey. There is scientific evidence of floods of that magnitude at that time. Finding the boat doesn't proove christianity's theory any more then it prooves and of the other theories. Yet the people in the article seem to think it'll be factual proof of christianity.
The point is that finding a boat at that altitude doesn't provide evidence that it unique to the story of the ark, there are a million other reasons why that boat could be there and no reason to choose christianity's version above anyone elses.
It's unconstitutional to force people to say it, that is definitly true and not even under discussion. This thing is alot of people think it's unconstitutional to have the government endorsing and religion reguardless of whether it's on a volentary basis or not.
The problem is it's not explicitly designed to be used to commit a crime. It's explicitly designed to allow people to share files. What files those people choose to share is what determines if there is a crime. And can you proove in court that they know they are profiting from copyright infringement? I doubt they monitor the network and cross check all the files for legitimacy.
They acknowledge that unauthorized copying is illigal, but state that just because something has illigal uses does not mean it is inherrintly illigal. The main purpose of the program is to move songs that you have a valid key for (read: that you own) from one format to another. That's simple fair use, completely legal. If you ban something because it can be used illigally in ways it was never intended to be used then you'll have to ban cars, knives, guns, peanut butter, computers; that doesn't make sense. This program moves information from one format to another, that's the same thing that a cd burner does. Just like a cd burner that process can be used legally or illigally. The fact that cd burners can be used towards illigal ends does not make cd burners themselves illigal. The fact that this program can be used towards illigal ends does not make this program illigal. Fair use doesn't state that you can only make personal copies in a certain way, it states that you can make personal copies, period. Apple isn't pursuing this because they think it fosters music theft, they're pursuing this because it decreased thier "Apple-authorized hardware" buisness.
There are digital filters. The problem is that digital filters are designed using the Forier Transform, so it suffers some of the same shortfalls ass the FFT (Fast Forier Transform). Filters have a rolloff, usually measured in dB per octave, that tells you how quickly the filter attenuates as you move away from the center frequency. The faster it roll's off the more ripples you get in the frequency responce plot (that's what produces the "ring"). If you've got a calculater graph y=sin(x)/x. That is the base equation that shows the ripples of a bandpass. There are windowing techniques to reduce the size of the ripples but it is mathamatically impossible to completely remove them. There really isn't a very good workaround to the time v. accuracy problem. It doesn't have anything to do with bad equipment or lack of trying, it's a result of the fundamental mathamatics behind digital audio.
It's not that simple. FFT doesn't give you exact frequencies. It lumps frequencies into "bins" that get more precise as larger chunks of time are analysed. It's not sufficient for sheet music because the time interval between notes in most music is smaller then the time interval required to differentiate those notes. There are ways to try and circumvent the accuracy problem (such as stuffing) but you still have to deal with bin leakage, and there would be no information available to seperate the notes of one instrument from another, let alone deterniming what is a base note and what is a harmonic interval. Maybe in time this will become possible, this is something I'd definitly like to take a crack at, but at the moment I don't believe it is.
If FFT's are used then it's probably as a kind of hash function, with the entire song taken at once. My original point was that lossy compression (especially the mp3 formats psychoacoustical compression) alters the frequency spectrum. So if you're using FFT to derive signatures, the quality of the mp3 is going to be somewhat proportional to the accuracy of your FFT results. How proportional is going to depend on the software's ability to interpret those results. I imagine it would be easy for entirely diffrent types of songs. But two diffrent songs from the same band recorded with the same instruments are bound to be close enough that the FFT discrepancies compression introduces are bound to be a signifigant problem.
I know many talented filmmakers who can't put their efforts together with enough ambition to inspire anybody to work with them.
But you agree that they are talented, even if they can't get their films to come together. It's not the directors job to pull everything together, that's the job of the producer and executive producer. Sometimes that's the same person as the director, but not always.
secure transfer of bulk encription keys, then with those keys they could transmit more keys
Wow.... that is a really bad idea. The entire purpose of changing keys is that if one is cracked by some freak lucky guess it won't be usefull for long...
I do see your point about the cost/usefullness. But this technology is still in it's infantcy. Just think of the first computers, as big as an entire room, god knows how expensive, and can't do any math more complicated then I can manage using an abacus. But things got better over time. Granted with computers they got better at a freakishly fast rate, and that probably won't be true with this technology, but with time I'm sure they will find more practical (cost effective) ways to implement it.
I'm sure they're doing experiments, but frankly, I really don't are if they are. You think the first guy to build a boat set in a lake and did experiments? No, I'm betting he sat in the lake and tried to figure out why he's taking in water. If we abandon space projects we're never gonna get anywhere.
Well, you do need encryption, and I doubt your going to get every eligable voter in the US to wait patiently in line for their turn. Your single voting machine would crash over lunch break day 1. If your lucky it might last till the end of the work day. But don't think it's gonna survive towards the end of the period when everyone realizes oh shit I gotta vote. That's what this distributed crap is.
Electoral college doesn't solve that problem, it just moves the location of the crime. It also practically invalidates some peoples votes. If your a democrat and you live in a mostly republican state then it really doesn't matter if you vote or not, your points are going to the republicans anyway.
Yes, they could keep accounts of everyone who voted. But what's to stop people from crying foul after the results are in that they want to switch their vote. How many people do you think would have switched from a 3rd party to Gore after they learned Bush was gonna win by such a small margin? It's easyer for digital information to be faked and thats only one of the reasons why I think eVoting is a bad idea.
As for a record of your voting history. I'm fairly sure it's illigal for anyone other then you to access that information (and if it isn't it should be), so if its important to you then just do it yourself.
Of course they will, votes still have to be split up by state, and they certainly aren't going to use just one server for the entire state. Trends will arise and people will try and take advantage of them.
Slashdot Mirror
Ahh.... the ever present grammar troll.... either unwilling or unable to make an actuall point....
Because there was a flood in turkey. There is scientific evidence of floods of that magnitude at that time. Finding the boat doesn't proove christianity's theory any more then it prooves and of the other theories. Yet the people in the article seem to think it'll be factual proof of christianity.
The point is that finding a boat at that altitude doesn't provide evidence that it unique to the story of the ark, there are a million other reasons why that boat could be there and no reason to choose christianity's version above anyone elses.
If they find a boat then that prooves what.... that people knew how to build boats?
It's unconstitutional to force people to say it, that is definitly true and not even under discussion. This thing is alot of people think it's unconstitutional to have the government endorsing and religion reguardless of whether it's on a volentary basis or not.
It was required at my school.
The problem is it's not explicitly designed to be used to commit a crime. It's explicitly designed to allow people to share files. What files those people choose to share is what determines if there is a crime. And can you proove in court that they know they are profiting from copyright infringement? I doubt they monitor the network and cross check all the files for legitimacy.
I don't think the program does anything illigal in the first place.
They acknowledge that unauthorized copying is illigal, but state that just because something has illigal uses does not mean it is inherrintly illigal. The main purpose of the program is to move songs that you have a valid key for (read: that you own) from one format to another. That's simple fair use, completely legal. If you ban something because it can be used illigally in ways it was never intended to be used then you'll have to ban cars, knives, guns, peanut butter, computers; that doesn't make sense. This program moves information from one format to another, that's the same thing that a cd burner does. Just like a cd burner that process can be used legally or illigally. The fact that cd burners can be used towards illigal ends does not make cd burners themselves illigal. The fact that this program can be used towards illigal ends does not make this program illigal. Fair use doesn't state that you can only make personal copies in a certain way, it states that you can make personal copies, period. Apple isn't pursuing this because they think it fosters music theft, they're pursuing this because it decreased thier "Apple-authorized hardware" buisness.
There are digital filters. The problem is that digital filters are designed using the Forier Transform, so it suffers some of the same shortfalls ass the FFT (Fast Forier Transform). Filters have a rolloff, usually measured in dB per octave, that tells you how quickly the filter attenuates as you move away from the center frequency. The faster it roll's off the more ripples you get in the frequency responce plot (that's what produces the "ring"). If you've got a calculater graph y=sin(x)/x. That is the base equation that shows the ripples of a bandpass. There are windowing techniques to reduce the size of the ripples but it is mathamatically impossible to completely remove them. There really isn't a very good workaround to the time v. accuracy problem. It doesn't have anything to do with bad equipment or lack of trying, it's a result of the fundamental mathamatics behind digital audio.
If FFT's are used then it's probably as a kind of hash function, with the entire song taken at once. My original point was that lossy compression (especially the mp3 formats psychoacoustical compression) alters the frequency spectrum. So if you're using FFT to derive signatures, the quality of the mp3 is going to be somewhat proportional to the accuracy of your FFT results. How proportional is going to depend on the software's ability to interpret those results. I imagine it would be easy for entirely diffrent types of songs. But two diffrent songs from the same band recorded with the same instruments are bound to be close enough that the FFT discrepancies compression introduces are bound to be a signifigant problem.
What do you mean by "10% of the mass (not including propellant) can be replaced"?? So they can't refuel it? What other mass would need to be replaced?
They didn't add the 'u', we took it out.
But you agree that they are talented, even if they can't get their films to come together. It's not the directors job to pull everything together, that's the job of the producer and executive producer. Sometimes that's the same person as the director, but not always.
What is that suspicion based on? You can't just walk around and demand to see the ID of every Mexican looking guy you meet.
Communism and Marxism are not the same thing.
Wow.... that is a really bad idea. The entire purpose of changing keys is that if one is cracked by some freak lucky guess it won't be usefull for long...
I do see your point about the cost/usefullness. But this technology is still in it's infantcy. Just think of the first computers, as big as an entire room, god knows how expensive, and can't do any math more complicated then I can manage using an abacus. But things got better over time. Granted with computers they got better at a freakishly fast rate, and that probably won't be true with this technology, but with time I'm sure they will find more practical (cost effective) ways to implement it.
FFT's would be skewed by the mp3 compression. I also wonder how probable it is that more then one song could match the same FFT profile.
That should read "I really don't care if they are" .... I gotta learn to use the preview button....
I'm sure they're doing experiments, but frankly, I really don't are if they are. You think the first guy to build a boat set in a lake and did experiments? No, I'm betting he sat in the lake and tried to figure out why he's taking in water. If we abandon space projects we're never gonna get anywhere.
Well, you do need encryption, and I doubt your going to get every eligable voter in the US to wait patiently in line for their turn. Your single voting machine would crash over lunch break day 1. If your lucky it might last till the end of the work day. But don't think it's gonna survive towards the end of the period when everyone realizes oh shit I gotta vote. That's what this distributed crap is.
Electoral college doesn't solve that problem, it just moves the location of the crime. It also practically invalidates some peoples votes. If your a democrat and you live in a mostly republican state then it really doesn't matter if you vote or not, your points are going to the republicans anyway.
As for a record of your voting history. I'm fairly sure it's illigal for anyone other then you to access that information (and if it isn't it should be), so if its important to you then just do it yourself.
Of course they will, votes still have to be split up by state, and they certainly aren't going to use just one server for the entire state. Trends will arise and people will try and take advantage of them.
First steps are always small...