...you can't. That's what "out of your control" means.
Well actually, you can. The trick is to inject noise into the system, such that Google/Facebook's statistical classifiers and the such stop working. For example, take pictures of yourself, and tag them using a stranger's name. Or, take random pictures not featuring yourself, and tag them using your own name. Perform fake google searches every day (search for stuff that you have no interest in whatsoever).
Sigh. Here is where most get it all wrong. It is not about *who* you are, or what you *have*, it is all about what you can *pretend* to be or have. Acting is the game.
It holds not just for men, but for women as well.
If you can't act, well then you know what to do...
The REAL challenge is not to come up with a practical solution. That part is easy.
The difficulty starts when communicating it to a parliament that lacks common sense, is steered by lobbying groups, and is subject to dynamics of political self-interest and plain stupidity.
What is the maximum current that can be transported through strips of various widths?
Other questions:
1. If a sheet of 1 atom thickness can transport x A/m at no loss, (ampere per meter of sheet), then how close can you stack these sheets together before x becomes significantly less?
2. If there is a (mutual) magnetic interference between two layers that destroys the superconducting effect, then will the superconductor actually work when immersed in an external magnetic field?
6) Insert noise into the system. Perform searches that have nothing to do with you. Tag yourself in photos that do not contain you. Tag your photos with another person's name, etc.
How do you solve the tagging problem? Your friends get on FB, someone posts a photo of you, that person or someone else tags it with your name and possibly other info. How do you keep your friends from adding you to the FB collective?
Wear a burqa. It's a remarkably effective technology invented by Muslims ages ago!
I just imagine that there are hundreds of Zuckerbergs that didn't make it to the top, and now suffer themselves from privacy violations by big corporations.
That is cool. But at the same time it is also the most lame way I could imagine to move stuff around. All the examples they show could be done better with a robot hand or two, with a FAR smaller number of actuators. Software that detects the position of each finger already exists.
So, airport security checks are useless and no more than a waste of taxpayers' money.
Your logic does not apply. Let me demonstrate why.
Say, you need perfume A, toothpaste B, and battery C to make an explosive. Now, it is known that the TSA builds a profile of you even before you enter the plane. This profile, combined with the information about stuff you bought post-checkin, can set off some alarm bells. Even if you buy stuff with several people.
Hence, while you can build an explosive with post-checkin materials, it is NOT CERTAIN you can buy them AND enter a plane. There is just one step missing in the logic.
Slashdot Mirror
Celebrating?
You do understand that this finding makes biology as a science much harder?
but Bezos predicts it'll be available to the public in the next 4-5 years.
In the next 4-5 years they will be obsoleted by 3d printers that can print stuff in our own home.
Now, if we can just agree on what we should do...
Prohibition of advertisement could be a good start.
This is very similar to copyright, so let's just call it personal copyright.
This will not work for the simple reason that in the EULA, you are waiving all your rights away.
Big companies win again.
It's kind of like security-by-obscurity. It's not the same as real security.
...you can't. That's what "out of your control" means.
Well actually, you can. The trick is to inject noise into the system, such that Google/Facebook's statistical classifiers and the such stop working.
For example, take pictures of yourself, and tag them using a stranger's name.
Or, take random pictures not featuring yourself, and tag them using your own name.
Perform fake google searches every day (search for stuff that you have no interest in whatsoever).
And so forth.
In fact, I see a business model here.
But what if the prng generates a code with all zeros?
Sigh. Here is where most get it all wrong. It is not about *who* you are, or what you *have*, it is all about what you can *pretend* to be or have.
Acting is the game.
It holds not just for men, but for women as well.
If you can't act, well then you know what to do...
After *I*-OS, you can now buy a phone running "Selfish-OS".
The question is: who needs a phone in a self-centered world?
The REAL challenge is not to come up with a practical solution. That part is easy.
The difficulty starts when communicating it to a parliament that lacks common sense, is steered by lobbying groups, and is subject to dynamics of political self-interest and plain stupidity.
Solve THAT, and I'm all ears.
What is the maximum current that can be transported through strips of various widths?
Other questions:
1. If a sheet of 1 atom thickness can transport x A/m at no loss, (ampere per meter of sheet), then how close can you stack these sheets together before x becomes significantly less?
2. If there is a (mutual) magnetic interference between two layers that destroys the superconducting effect, then will the superconductor actually work when immersed in an external magnetic field?
Bitcoin itself is of course not anonymous, otherwise its name would have not been known.
Its use on the other hand...
6) Insert noise into the system. Perform searches that have nothing to do with you. Tag yourself in photos that do not contain you. Tag your photos with another person's name, etc.
How do you solve the tagging problem? Your friends get on FB, someone posts a photo of you, that person or someone else tags it with your name and possibly other info. How do you keep your friends from adding you to the FB collective?
Wear a burqa. It's a remarkably effective technology invented by Muslims ages ago!
I just imagine that there are hundreds of Zuckerbergs that didn't make it to the top, and now suffer themselves from privacy violations by big corporations.
The main thing I do to protect my privacy is not to use "free" services
All search engines are "free" services.
I think spammers are smart enough to evade that trick.
They're chess grandmasters, but they are still not able to deduce that "beating" is not necessarily a mathematical total order.
What about the hundreds of thousands of small developers who support it?
Do they get a "vote", too ... or is it only the people who are rich enough to bribe senators?
Those developers already voted by buying MS products and by using Google stuff.
That whole sockaddr design sucks. It's about time somebody (or some compiler) complained about it.
finally
C++0x does not have "finally".
You'll have to implement it yourself, e.g. using a destructor.
See for example: http://codereview.stackexchange.com/questions/2864/an-implementation-of-finally-in-c0x
They use a LIDAR system for that. Pretty ancient technology. Also used for law enforcement (speed guns).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_driverless_car
According to the article, this system costs $70.000 euros.
That's a far cry from the $80 euros of a typical kinect system.
I guess that's the price you pay for brute forcing your way into the market.
That is cool. But at the same time it is also the most lame way I could imagine to move stuff around.
All the examples they show could be done better with a robot hand or two, with a FAR smaller number of actuators.
Software that detects the position of each finger already exists.
So, airport security checks are useless and no more than a waste of taxpayers' money.
Your logic does not apply. Let me demonstrate why.
Say, you need perfume A, toothpaste B, and battery C to make an explosive.
Now, it is known that the TSA builds a profile of you even before you enter the plane.
This profile, combined with the information about stuff you bought post-checkin, can set off some alarm bells.
Even if you buy stuff with several people.
Hence, while you can build an explosive with post-checkin materials, it is NOT CERTAIN you can buy them AND enter a plane.
There is just one step missing in the logic.
Indeed, it looks quite safe compared to JS.
The only disadvantage of NaCl code is that it only runs on one brand of browser. Sigh.