Arent these cameras pretty sensitive to IR light anyway? Wouldnt it just be easier to blast a bright IR flash every few seconds that would just wash out the image, making any recording impractical?
The problem is not Process (either the lack of or too much of), the problem is People.
No Process + Bad People = bad results (see GIGO) No Process + Good People = good results Processes + Bad People = bad results Processes + Good People = good results
See the pattern? Now, in theory, good Process + Good People should > No Process + Good People
I've tried implementing various processes and the problem is always the people. Some people get it, some don't. Some refuse to use it, some dont understand it. Some people's internal workings just arent compatible with the process. Experience is important.. more experience usually means more acceptance of process.
You have to match the process to the people or vice versa.
Sharing your WiFi makes you just like an ISP, legally (in theory).
You should put a bandwidth cap on your Personal ISP service, because its reasonable to say your stuff is more important but you still want to share whats left over.
Lets compare to an actual ISP:
You should sell your services for a reasonable price.
You ARE an ISP so you have legal protections (in theory) against things your users do that could be illegal.
You should NOT put a bandwidth cap on your ISP service, because thats unreasonable, you should let your users run hog wild using up all the bandwidth they can suck up downloading porn.
Am I the only one see the discrepancy here between what this article is saying and Net Neutrality in general? Seems like a contradiction to me. (that said, I agree with the contradiction, I just don't know how to explain why its ok).
This is point that has come up for me before, the idea that Science is really just faith of another kind.
But its not the same.
Lets take a much more simple example than all the quantum physics and other examples that are really hard to understand much less demonstrate.
The Earth revolves around the sun, and is not flat.
Do any of us *know* this is true? Have any of us actually gone through the process of calculations and observations that prove this is so? I haven't. I accept that its true, but not on faith, but because it makes sense and because I know I could prove it if necessary. I rely on the fact that thousands of other people also think this, many of whom have proven it, and because nobody else has disproven it. You collect all that together to form your conclusion that its true.
Now, if I had read one book on the subject, a book that simply stated it was so without any explanation of how or why, a book that had not been revised except by language translation, and offered no method of proof, and in fact told you that to prove it was futile, then that would be faith.
well, of course, its nicer I think to see it done voluntarily (between the users and the fcc in this case with the help of a router manufacturer) rather than having legislation (never mind the time it would take to do, the money involved, etc).
And thats an interesting point.. I wonder if its possible (or rather, feasible or practical) to detect whatever the SamKnows firmware is doing (I assume its communicating information directly to some server) and then compensate for that by giving those users better access. And then I wonder if they would do that. If so, then, GREAT! I'll get better access now! I haven't noticed a difference though.,,
Do you really trust your ISP to give you the full bandwidth they are overselling, er, I mean, selling you? And then you think they would collect statistics voluntarily and hand that over to someone else who might then tell them they are not providing the service they advertise?
Yeah, I believe in fairies too. I do believe in fairies, I do believe..
PS yeah its a cheap Netgear router. But it can run dd-wrt. Haven't decided yet if I'm going to flash it, since I do I want them to get the information they are after first. And I'm on Time warner cable. I'm pretty sure they use fairy dust..
Am I the only one who's first thought was: could you actually make some kind of solar power generating device using a huge inflatable structure, maybe taking advantage of internal convection or something? That way you are creating shade at the same time you are generating power..
I think inflatable technology is the future..
* Space habitats (http://www.bigelowaerospace.com/) * Cars (http://www.myxpcar.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=3&Itemid=14) * Telecommunications (http://www.space.com/8973-1st-communication-satellite-giant-space-balloon-50-years.html)
There's one thing about this that nobody seems to be noticing, and that is how good this is from the perspective of companies that want to sell you more product... as opposed to you fixing your product, they'd rather you buy a new one.
Huh?
Did you read the part about how the bearings (I assume these were not made using the same process, but I am sure at some point they would be) are essentially embedded into the structure as it was built up around them? Guess what? That means you are SOL when they wear out.
Products are already manufactured and assembled often going out their way to be difficult to disassemble to discourage repairs (at least by yourself; authorized repairs require special tools, etc). Imagine the future where, these awesome items are cool to look at and cheaper than ever to design, prototype and manufacture and oh by the way they are impossible to repair unless you want to recycle the whole thing because they are built up and around other components in such a way that its not possible to disassemble at all.
Am I proposing there's some conspiracy here? of course not. But its nice and convenient for our throw away society and I am sure somebody's already realized this and is salivating at the thought of non-repairable items.
You keep hearing about how they want to raise prices for all those lousy bandwidth hogs. I guess thats fair, on some level? So what about all the people who use much less than the average amount of bandwidth?
If they want to charge the hogs more, then they should also proportionally charge the non-hogs (mice? sippers?) less!
Yet I have never heard anybody seriously suggest anything of the sort.
Well, she might not precisely fit your requirements, but give her a chance:
* she's an actress so maybe you've seen her. Actresses are popular and know. * She's smart and educated. * She's actually done something with her smarts (write math books). * She's attractive (you do have a boy, right?)
A great role model for girls, at least, if not boys too.
OK, so, kids with computers don't do as well as those without computers.
Thats next to meaningless. What is the breakdown in each of those groups?
Lets group the kids in each of those two categories into smaller groupings, taking into account things like:
How much time is spent playing games? How much time is spent on the internet? How much on "educational games"? How much on productivity software (word processing etc)?
Are they doing school work vs games? Are they being monitored by the parents or left to their own?
I'd like to see all this data and have it analysed.
I am betting you will find the correlation to lower educational results has more to do with how the computer is being used and less to do with simply having one.
With that said, I am a geek, I spend most of my day working on my computer (programming), but I do NOT allow my kids to spend a great deal of time on computers. In fact, very little. They get to play a game now and then, or do research and write reports.
Consequently they score higher than average in school.
Really? You really think that lemmings on the iPhone or Palm Pre is going to in any way effect sales of Ericson Android phones? I don't think even Sony would think that.
This is just simply them not wanting anyone else having anything to do with their IP, period, whether it makes any kind of impact or not. Which they have every right to enforce. Doesn't mean its the best way to approach the situation...
It seems Sony is well within their rights to go after this guy and bury the ports.
However, wouldn't it be much better for public relations, marketing, not to mention cheaper (not having to pay their lawyers), to just send him a check and say "hey thanks for making these ports! Please send us the source code and here's a check for your work".
I mean really. I'm sure the guy would be thrilled to get a few K for his time that he never expected to get, and Sony gets a few more ports to make a few $ off of. Everybody wins!
Unfortunately the days of getting a magazine every month are probably gone.
Byte, Radio & Electronics, Popular Electronics, etc.. fond memories.
But this is the new millenium. There must be some equivalent by todays standards.
It would be a website, of course. And it would have to have some good writers adding articles, not monthly but as they are completed. And not just "I blogged today about xyz", but actual articles.
Of course it would also have aggregated links like slashdot to other interesting sites found by people who know whats good and whats not.
It would cover programming, hardware, robotics, etc.
I don't know of such a site. I would start one myself but I don't know where to begin. Anybody want to try?
I too grew up with Apple II's and C64's and programming had a certain allure that it just doesnt have now. How does a kid get into this today? I don't know.
The only thing I can think of is that my kid(s) will see that I am doing it for hours a day and wonder, what is so interesting that daddy spends all day doing it?
They have to have their interest sparked first. It has to start with a question.
Kid: What are you doing? Dad: Well, I am programming. I'm telling my computer what to do. Kid: Can you make a game? Dad: Yes. It takes a little while though.
Yes, its likely that games are going to be what gets a person into programming these days. Heck, its what got me into it, even though I don't make games now. Making games is like being a rock star -- very few people get there, but there's plenty of other things you can do.
The fact that a kid likes games doesn't mean they have any interest in making the games. But if they ask, hey how does this work? Then you have something.
How well (if at all) will a touch interface work on a flexible screen?
All this talk about roll up screens and such, but imagine trying to use your iPhone if it was a piece of paper. And its not laying flat on a hard surface.
For some reason, when I read this, I did not see "patents" but instead I saw "parents".
So I thought it was somehow an article about how parents have lost control completely. I say this as my 2 year old (boy) is trashing my living room and screaming for no apparent reason.
So I put him to bed.
Come to think of it, there's a lot of patents that should be put to bed too.
I think bigger question is how many hours a week are you actually able to program when you consider all interruptions. I rarely am able to program for more hours than my brain is capable of.
When you have managers wanting meetings three times a week (granted, they are short usually), you expect to get a least a few inquiries a day about the code from someone who's not understanding what you are doing, and you work from home and/or you just get called frequently by the Significant Other... all these interruptions break up your day resulting actual concentrated programming being hard to do for any length of time.
I find I probably only spend 10 - 16 hours a week doing solid coding. Another 10 - 16 is spent just thinking about higher level things like architecture or scaling issues or whatever, and depending on the week 4 - 8 hours "alternately stimulating" my brain with related (slashdot) but not directly applicable stuff. The rest is taken up by the aforementioned interruptions.
In the article its says they split hydrogen into protons and electrons that need to be recombined into atoms and molecules..
Am I missing something basic about chemistry and physics or are the writers of the article just mucking up the information? Aren't they just splitting hydrogen from oxygen using H20 as the "fuel" and sun light as the energy?
stop thinking in negative terms ("disincentive"?).
Lets be realistic. They're going to download anyway. Its just more convenient. You're going to lose that sale anyway. So, bill them, and I guarantee some people will pay (and, maybe next time, will just pay upfront). So, you've made more money than you would have otherwise.
Because you are right, lawsuits and new laws aren't going to make much if any difference. So why waste the time and money?
Lets not think of disincentives. Lets think about the incentives. If people download this way (using P2P file sharing) and you can just bill them and a certain percentage will pay, what does that mean for the record companies? It means they dont have to pay for the expense of ANY kind of delivery mechanism for their product. No inventory (old fashioned CDs). No packaging. No distribution. No servers! No bandwidth. No IT management of said servers. No customer support. No returns. They dont have to do anything that they would normally be expected to do for a reputable company delivering a product because their not responsible for any of it because people are doing it themselves.
Now of course, they'd probably still want to run a legitimate download service and *charge less* than they will bill you for if you steal it. And even then they dont have to run such a service with things like iTunes around.
Even better, they could possibly do the billing through your ISP and just add it to your monthly service bill. What are you going to do about it? Claim you didn't steal anything? Well then you can go to small claims or something. And maybe they don't even bother to fight it.
I'm not really seeing the downside here.
All of this assuming they can relatively accurately track your downloads and be correct 90% of the time.
Honestly, if I download some song and they try to sue me for some absurd amount of money, I am going to fight it and its going to make them look bad. If they just bill me for $20 I might get, at best, a little annoyed, but hey I'm guilty so I'll probably just pay it and be done with it. And I would probably think twice before doing it again, especially if I can go do iTunes and download it for $15.
Slashdot Mirror
Arent these cameras pretty sensitive to IR light anyway? Wouldnt it just be easier to blast a bright IR flash every few seconds that would just wash out the image, making any recording impractical?
The problem is not Process (either the lack of or too much of), the problem is People.
No Process + Bad People = bad results (see GIGO)
No Process + Good People = good results
Processes + Bad People = bad results
Processes + Good People = good results
See the pattern? Now, in theory, good Process + Good People should > No Process + Good People
I've tried implementing various processes and the problem is always the people. Some people get it, some don't. Some refuse to use it, some dont understand it. Some people's internal workings just arent compatible with the process. Experience is important.. more experience usually means more acceptance of process.
You have to match the process to the people or vice versa.
Let me see if I understand here.
You should share your WiFi.
Sharing your WiFi makes you just like an ISP, legally (in theory).
You should put a bandwidth cap on your Personal ISP service, because its reasonable to say your stuff is more important but you still want to share whats left over.
Lets compare to an actual ISP:
You should sell your services for a reasonable price.
You ARE an ISP so you have legal protections (in theory) against things your users do that could be illegal.
You should NOT put a bandwidth cap on your ISP service, because thats unreasonable, you should let your users run hog wild using up all the bandwidth they can suck up downloading porn.
Am I the only one see the discrepancy here between what this article is saying and Net Neutrality in general? Seems like a contradiction to me. (that said, I agree with the contradiction, I just don't know how to explain why its ok).
This is point that has come up for me before, the idea that Science is really just faith of another kind.
But its not the same.
Lets take a much more simple example than all the quantum physics and other examples that are really hard to understand much less demonstrate.
The Earth revolves around the sun, and is not flat.
Do any of us *know* this is true? Have any of us actually gone through the process of calculations and observations that prove this is so? I haven't. I accept that its true, but not on faith, but because it makes sense and because I know I could prove it if necessary. I rely on the fact that thousands of other people also think this, many of whom have proven it, and because nobody else has disproven it. You collect all that together to form your conclusion that its true.
Now, if I had read one book on the subject, a book that simply stated it was so without any explanation of how or why, a book that had not been revised except by language translation, and offered no method of proof, and in fact told you that to prove it was futile, then that would be faith.
well, of course, its nicer I think to see it done voluntarily (between the users and the fcc in this case with the help of a router manufacturer) rather than having legislation (never mind the time it would take to do, the money involved, etc).
And thats an interesting point.. I wonder if its possible (or rather, feasible or practical) to detect whatever the SamKnows firmware is doing (I assume its communicating information directly to some server) and then compensate for that by giving those users better access. And then I wonder if they would do that. If so, then, GREAT! I'll get better access now! I haven't noticed a difference though.,,
Do you really trust your ISP to give you the full bandwidth they are overselling, er, I mean, selling you? And then you think they would collect statistics voluntarily and hand that over to someone else who might then tell them they are not providing the service they advertise?
Yeah, I believe in fairies too. I do believe in fairies, I do believe..
PS yeah its a cheap Netgear router. But it can run dd-wrt. Haven't decided yet if I'm going to flash it, since I do I want them to get the information they are after first. And I'm on Time warner cable. I'm pretty sure they use fairy dust..
Am I the only one who's first thought was: could you actually make some kind of solar power generating device using a huge inflatable structure, maybe taking advantage of internal convection or something? That way you are creating shade at the same time you are generating power..
I think inflatable technology is the future..
* Space habitats (http://www.bigelowaerospace.com/)
* Cars (http://www.myxpcar.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=3&Itemid=14)
* Telecommunications (http://www.space.com/8973-1st-communication-satellite-giant-space-balloon-50-years.html)
There's one thing about this that nobody seems to be noticing, and that is how good this is from the perspective of companies that want to sell you more product... as opposed to you fixing your product, they'd rather you buy a new one.
Huh?
Did you read the part about how the bearings (I assume these were not made using the same process, but I am sure at some point they would be) are essentially embedded into the structure as it was built up around them? Guess what? That means you are SOL when they wear out.
Products are already manufactured and assembled often going out their way to be difficult to disassemble to discourage repairs (at least by yourself; authorized repairs require special tools, etc). Imagine the future where, these awesome items are cool to look at and cheaper than ever to design, prototype and manufacture and oh by the way they are impossible to repair unless you want to recycle the whole thing because they are built up and around other components in such a way that its not possible to disassemble at all.
Am I proposing there's some conspiracy here? of course not. But its nice and convenient for our throw away society and I am sure somebody's already realized this and is salivating at the thought of non-repairable items.
You keep hearing about how they want to raise prices for all those lousy bandwidth hogs. I guess thats fair, on some level? So what about all the people who use much less than the average amount of bandwidth?
If they want to charge the hogs more, then they should also proportionally charge the non-hogs (mice? sippers?) less!
Yet I have never heard anybody seriously suggest anything of the sort.
I wonder why...
Well, she might not precisely fit your requirements, but give her a chance:
* she's an actress so maybe you've seen her. Actresses are popular and know.
* She's smart and educated.
* She's actually done something with her smarts (write math books).
* She's attractive (you do have a boy, right?)
A great role model for girls, at least, if not boys too.
I bet there'd be a huge market for these! What boy wouldn't want an inflatable rocket launcher? I know I do!
Its just another step along the way to where we never fix anything we just buy a new one.
Its happened to many other products and industries.
Its our throw-away society. Don't fix things, just toss it and get a new one. Its better for the economy!
They should just start putting labels on the computers:
"No user serviceable software inside"
OK, so, kids with computers don't do as well as those without computers.
Thats next to meaningless. What is the breakdown in each of those groups?
Lets group the kids in each of those two categories into smaller groupings, taking into account things like:
How much time is spent playing games?
How much time is spent on the internet?
How much on "educational games"?
How much on productivity software (word processing etc)?
Are they doing school work vs games?
Are they being monitored by the parents or left to their own?
I'd like to see all this data and have it analysed.
I am betting you will find the correlation to lower educational results has more to do with how the computer is being used and less to do with simply having one.
With that said, I am a geek, I spend most of my day working on my computer (programming), but I do NOT allow my kids to spend a great deal of time on computers. In fact, very little. They get to play a game now and then, or do research and write reports.
Consequently they score higher than average in school.
Really? You really think that lemmings on the iPhone or Palm Pre is going to in any way effect sales of Ericson Android phones? I don't think even Sony would think that.
This is just simply them not wanting anyone else having anything to do with their IP, period, whether it makes any kind of impact or not. Which they have every right to enforce. Doesn't mean its the best way to approach the situation...
It seems Sony is well within their rights to go after this guy and bury the ports.
However, wouldn't it be much better for public relations, marketing, not to mention cheaper (not having to pay their lawyers), to just send him a check and say "hey thanks for making these ports! Please send us the source code and here's a check for your work".
I mean really. I'm sure the guy would be thrilled to get a few K for his time that he never expected to get, and Sony gets a few more ports to make a few $ off of. Everybody wins!
I wouldnt be suprised to see them give it a good push just like they did with DVDs..
FOR PORN!
Ooops, sorry..
Unfortunately the days of getting a magazine every month are probably gone.
Byte, Radio & Electronics, Popular Electronics, etc.. fond memories.
But this is the new millenium. There must be some equivalent by todays standards.
It would be a website, of course. And it would have to have some good writers adding articles, not monthly but as they are completed. And not just "I blogged today about xyz", but actual articles.
Of course it would also have aggregated links like slashdot to other interesting sites found by people who know whats good and whats not.
It would cover programming, hardware, robotics, etc.
I don't know of such a site. I would start one myself but I don't know where to begin. Anybody want to try?
I too grew up with Apple II's and C64's and programming had a certain allure that it just doesnt have now. How does a kid get into this today? I don't know.
The only thing I can think of is that my kid(s) will see that I am doing it for hours a day and wonder, what is so interesting that daddy spends all day doing it?
They have to have their interest sparked first. It has to start with a question.
Kid: What are you doing?
Dad: Well, I am programming. I'm telling my computer what to do.
Kid: Can you make a game?
Dad: Yes. It takes a little while though.
Yes, its likely that games are going to be what gets a person into programming these days. Heck, its what got me into it, even though I don't make games now. Making games is like being a rock star -- very few people get there, but there's plenty of other things you can do.
The fact that a kid likes games doesn't mean they have any interest in making the games. But if they ask, hey how does this work? Then you have something.
How well (if at all) will a touch interface work on a flexible screen?
All this talk about roll up screens and such, but imagine trying to use your iPhone if it was a piece of paper. And its not laying flat on a hard surface.
For some reason, when I read this, I did not see "patents" but instead I saw "parents".
So I thought it was somehow an article about how parents have lost control completely. I say this as my 2 year old (boy) is trashing my living room and screaming for no apparent reason.
So I put him to bed.
Come to think of it, there's a lot of patents that should be put to bed too.
There, not completely off topic anymore..
I think bigger question is how many hours a week are you actually able to program when you consider all interruptions. I rarely am able to program for more hours than my brain is capable of.
When you have managers wanting meetings three times a week (granted, they are short usually), you expect to get a least a few inquiries a day about the code from someone who's not understanding what you are doing, and you work from home and/or you just get called frequently by the Significant Other... all these interruptions break up your day resulting actual concentrated programming being hard to do for any length of time.
I find I probably only spend 10 - 16 hours a week doing solid coding. Another 10 - 16 is spent just thinking about higher level things like architecture or scaling issues or whatever, and depending on the week 4 - 8 hours "alternately stimulating" my brain with related (slashdot) but not directly applicable stuff. The rest is taken up by the aforementioned interruptions.
But I'm not a "grunt programmer" either.
In the article its says they split hydrogen into protons and electrons that need to be recombined into atoms and molecules..
Am I missing something basic about chemistry and physics or are the writers of the article just mucking up the information? Aren't they just splitting hydrogen from oxygen using H20 as the "fuel" and sun light as the energy?
I get the same results they do when using IE8. But on my Mac, in Firefox 3.6, I get 30 to 45fps.. how is it so much faster? Is this a mac thing?
stop thinking in negative terms ("disincentive"?).
Lets be realistic. They're going to download anyway. Its just more convenient. You're going to lose that sale anyway. So, bill them, and I guarantee some people will pay (and, maybe next time, will just pay upfront). So, you've made more money than you would have otherwise.
Because you are right, lawsuits and new laws aren't going to make much if any difference. So why waste the time and money?
Lets not think of disincentives. Lets think about the incentives. If people download this way (using P2P file sharing) and you can just bill them and a certain percentage will pay, what does that mean for the record companies? It means they dont have to pay for the expense of ANY kind of delivery mechanism for their product. No inventory (old fashioned CDs). No packaging. No distribution. No servers! No bandwidth. No IT management of said servers. No customer support. No returns. They dont have to do anything that they would normally be expected to do for a reputable company delivering a product because their not responsible for any of it because people are doing it themselves.
Now of course, they'd probably still want to run a legitimate download service and *charge less* than they will bill you for if you steal it. And even then they dont have to run such a service with things like iTunes around.
Even better, they could possibly do the billing through your ISP and just add it to your monthly service bill. What are you going to do about it? Claim you didn't steal anything? Well then you can go to small claims or something. And maybe they don't even bother to fight it.
I'm not really seeing the downside here.
All of this assuming they can relatively accurately track your downloads and be correct 90% of the time.
Honestly, if I download some song and they try to sue me for some absurd amount of money, I am going to fight it and its going to make them look bad. If they just bill me for $20 I might get, at best, a little annoyed, but hey I'm guilty so I'll probably just pay it and be done with it. And I would probably think twice before doing it again, especially if I can go do iTunes and download it for $15.