I wasn't in any way responding to the specifics of this case. And I very clearly stated that videoing law enforcement was an important supervision. You're completely misrepresenting my statements.
n fact, make felony crimes by police officers equivalent to laws that double sentences for crimes committed with a gun. They have a gun, and if they committed and are convicted of a crime, what's the difference?
If you make every crime a police officer a felony with a weapon you're neglecting the fact that police officers are required to carry a weapon as part of their duties. I want armed police officers. And we call on Police officers to carry out borderline unethical behavior on a daily basis.
It's important to hold law enforcement accountable and I think video is a good first step. But I also think it's important to point out that law enforcement is by design in a precarious position legally and we have to make allowances (such as carrying a weapon at all times and authorized to use it) in order for them to perform the job we've demanded of them as citizens.
Just because there happens to be some hallways doesn't disprove my point. When I say "Starship Hallways" I mean 95% of the film takes place in a hallway that can be redressed to look like new places. Take Star Gate Universe. They have a couple of rooms but a large portion of the show is people walking back and forth across redressed sections of the same hallway. Or they're in an empty forest. Or a forest with some tents. You only have to build a couple sets and you're good for an entire season.
Now let's look at Star Wars A New Hope (from memory so I apologize for missing your favorite shots):
Tatooine Exterior
Star Destroy Exterior
Blockade Runner Exterior
Rebel Cruiser Hallway
Different style of Rebel Cruiser Hallway
Star Destroyer Turret Room.
Escape Pod
Desert (Fair enough)
Desert Canyon (different from desert and probably hundreds of miles away)
Fan films are *NOT MADE* for under $20k. They're made for hundreds of thousands of dollars in donated time.
You can bet your ass the industry is going to be charging out the whazoo for them. Those people need to eat, drink and be merry like yourself. I'll happily work for free on a Star Wars live action TV show when all of the grocers, plumbers, gas station attendants and other viewers of my work start giving me free products and services as well.
The reason people charge up the Whazoo is because it costs a lot of money. One my largest pet peeves is when people make independent films where dozens or hundreds of people donate their time, money and resources and then the producers turn around and brag about how little movies can be made for.
It's like a homeless person claiming that restaurants charge ridiculous funds, after all "I was able to eat for an entire month for $2, no wonder the economy is tanking if everyone else pays hundreds of dollars a month for food."
They reached 2.8km according to this article [ing.dk] (in Danish).
So... 2.8% of the way there. Does that mean they need to build a rocket 50x bigger? I was really excited about the idea of a minimalist rocket shuttle with the sole intent of getting someone up to 100+ km
But it's not terribly encouraging when the current design can't even reach a Cessna.
Put more succintly: copyright is a legal entitlement, not a moral one.
A copyright might not intrinsically assign a moral entitlement... but that doesn't it can't overlap.
If I were to spend a long time working on a book and I let you read it but you OCR'ed it and started printing hundreds of thousands of copies without paying me for the right then I think I would be right in feeling morally wronged at your exploitation of my work.
I'm not going to defend the police officers in this case. And a large number of them are assholes and criminals and they were before they joined the police force so it wasn't a case of a "hard life" toughening them. But in defense of law enforcement they are exposed to an unprecedented level of douche bagery by scum bags on a daily basis. And not people speeding I mean real anti-social dicks who deserve to serve life sentences themselves for the betterment of society. And the only way to stop crime is to do many of the things that we convict and imprison people for. Arresting someone if you aren't a police officer would be kidnapping. If a speeder simply could escape by driving 10 mph over the speed limit and the cop never being able to catch up then it would be all but impossible to enforce speed limit laws.
There's a certain level of hypocrisy and contradiction that is intrinsic to their jobs. And we require them to walk that tight rope between doing their jobs and infringing civil rights. So I do think to some degree we have to award them some leniency when they legitimately make an honest mistake. But I do support laws that record officers doing their jobs.
And while there are situations where I wouldn't want someone recording on the street I think there should be an official record. I once gave a witness report for a felony assault. "Someone" walked up and started asking questions and trying to get close to record me and the officer. I was happy that the police officer forced the person to leave and had him escorted a good distance away since it was pretty clear that it was a friend of the person who had committed the assault--and I wasn't too anxious to have him recording me.
Well I would disagree about #3. It is "Their" network. The assumption I make when I install the Skype software is that I will be interacting in a P2P network with other Skype software users.
As the PR guy points out this allows Skype to better ensure the clients are legitimate users. It's a lot easier to spoof accounts, spam thousands of users etc. when there is no API and only a GUI interface. For instance I've never once received a spam message on Skype. I get at least one a month on other open messaging services.
If I'm a P2P hub/server then I expect that I'm facilitating skype services which I use not some spammer.
Similarly Skype also has "their" physical servers. And if they only want to use their bandwidth to facilitate customers who are seeing their ads then they should be legally able to refuse service to non-customers. They can no longer do that since they can't tell the difference between a non-customer reverse engineered client and a legacy client.
So I would say this is a different situation from something like BIOS reverse engineering in that this isn't to facilitate someone to setup a parallel and independent competing product based on the specs, it's going to be using people and Skype's computers and bandwidth to facilitate a network which might be behaving differently from what they agreed to when downloading the Skype software.
I prefer the Duke controller over the S model, or the new 360 for that matter. Just because you have tiny girl hands does not mean that some of us don't have normal sized hands.
I loved the original Xbox controller. The new one is way better than the S controller which was unusable in my opinion but there's still nothing that compares to the ergonomics of the original. I have little tiny child sized hands but it was still incredibly comfortable.
I don't see how embedding a sanctuary episode on your website is any different than uploading it to your site and streaming it from your own servers.
I approve of this law. If you started hosting a site called "Sanctuary for Free!" and then aggregated and kept an up to date embedded video on a number of pages for every episode you're effectively streaming it yourself. The fact that you're using a 3rd party host to actually hold the bits is irellevant in my mind. Your intent is clear in providing copyrighted material to your customers.
A similar example would be to take a photo from a photographers page and post it on your own but not actually downloading and saving it to your own server. It's obvious that it's copyright infringement to use the photographer's work on your website but the fact that it's being hosted on the photographer's page is irrelevant.
You also can't sue YouTube since they're protected by safe harbor. With the existing law there is a loop hole where you can have someone upload it to YouTube (or more likely megadrive) and then stream it from their websites through yours and as long as they can't prove you uploaded it be completely innocent.
If you don't believe in copyright that's one thing. But if you accept the notion of copyright being a valid then this is a common sense definition of copyright infringement.
The one exception I would make is the linking rule. I don't think links should be banned since that's freedom of speech and no copyrighted content is within your website. And someone could trick you by changing their innocuous page into an infringing page. Also you might link to the NYTimes but they might have accidentally posted a photo they don't have rights to in which case without intent to cause infringement you might run afoul the law.
Frames pose an interesting question though. I would say illegal. If the primary website is still yours but you have a frame with youtube in it I would consider that "embedded". Ditto with CSS boxes or other such overlays. Pop-Ups I suppose would have to be acceptable since they're just a link.
Nonsense. We have jay-walking laws but they usually aren't enforced. That doesn't mean you couldn't cite someone who pulled a particularly egregious instance that endangered people.
"Get the state entangled in the messy task of regulating the Internet."
In other words the messy task of... governing. Welcome to government. Your job as a legislator is to solve the messy problems of regulating business, commerce and citizens.
I think ReadyDrive has failed mostly because it was left to the drive controller to handle the caching.
My understanding is that with Win8 they're moving the logic to the OS and divorcing the hardware from the equation freeing you to buy any old spinning medium and any old fast SSD/Raid to act as your cache.
I like this idea since I can 'upgrade' my existing drives to ReadyDrive by just buying a SSD and I can still have my multiple disks but just the one SSD between them.
I hear rumblings that Windows 8 is going to finally solve this once and for all at the OS level. Designate a drive as a cache drive and it'll fill it up with frequently used files and the current cache. Then when you go into standby it can just dump all of your RAM to the SSD. Start back up and it reads off the SSD.
These things are ridiculously expensive and virtually never pay for themselves -- ever.
The problem with this mindset is that it only measures ticket sales. If you make travel between cities incredibly fast then you open up all kinds of new business opportunities and larger efficiencies.
There is certainly a need to balance cost/benefit but too often we only balance direct costs vs direct benefit while ignoring the larger returns that result.
Picture for a moment Broadband internet. If a couple of universities needed to move large files then it wouldn't make sense to lay fiber optic lines across the country--you could just overnight fedex them. But once you do lay fiber to everybody suddenly you can teleconference, you can have movies delivered to the home, you can create an entire entertainment sector where people play MMOs etc etc...
When I was in highschool I had to plead with my parents to get internet. And then a second phone line. And then broadband. Now thanks to what I mostly learned on the internet I have a high paying job. It was a great investment that they made--but not one necessarily that looked like it should pay itself off. I mostly wanted high-speed admittedly to play games. As a gaming connection it was a complete money loser. But it opened up my world and from that I found unintended consequences.
Conservatives tend to be the ones who always bemoan the unintended consequences of market intervention. But for some reason everyone seems to believe that there can only be negative unintended consequences.
I agree. This "A Windows machine will be pwned in less than 30 seconds" is complete and utter bullshit.
I've never taken any precautions when setting up a PC and I've plugged it into the internet while installing windows without any additional firewalls and I've NEVER had a computer automagically compromised without executing something or clicking a compromised link.
Anything less than a full duplicate wouldn't function as a simulation, and a full duplicate wouldn't function as a model (because it would give you no more insight than the identical original.
Yes and no. It does offer something though that we can't do to a real human brain: Kill it. Over and Over and Over again.
You certainly start getting into philosophical problems but imagine if you took a slice of your brain and ran a simulation for 10 minutes in a perfectly realized virtual world (or a world that explicitly told your brain to accept as perfect). You could subtly change a person's responses to you to see how you react based on different stimuli. Then wipe it. Reset it to the exact same state and do it again.
Now you can start doing really exciting things with this exact duplicate. Since this simulation is a total simulation of all the atomic and sub-atomic interactions on a computer you can do things like insert break points. Freeze time and know the exact state of every atom. You can run difference splits between two moments of a conversation.
This is the sort of insight that would lead to accurate modeling.
A big part of learning how a system works it to strip it down to its core essentials. Usually 95% of something is just superfluous support framework. With a virtual brain you could start gutting the systems without concern since killing it can be 'undone'. Imagine a computer algorithm which ran a conversation but completely randomly eliminated 1,000 neurons every time. Just put a condition on the test that any time the conditions fail --say maybe stammering -- then you do another random test with only 500 removed. And so on and so forth until the test succeeds. Without actually understanding *why* the simulation works you can randomly dramatically narrow your focus.
Is it ethical? Well it'll be an interesting conversation we'll have when we start. Or at least I hope we do. I'm actually pretty concerned we'll create a conscious entity and not realize it. We might end up committing genocide on new sentient life forms.
So if something has a north/south polarity in magnetism we say it has a strong "Magnetic Dipole Moment"? Or more simply I would using my non-physicist vocabulary say it has a distinct Magnetic Polarity. Magnetic Moment = Amount of polarity?
So even though the electron obviously has an average electric charge some theories think it might actually be the product of a slightly + in addition to being mostly - field?
But this study found that there isn't any duality to the charge; it's to the best of our measurements completely singularly charged and therefore has no polarity or shape?
I'm getting thrown by "Bipole Moment" since I don't know what that means but I feel like it's important to your explanation.:D
I'm imagining a magnetic field in my head. If you could create a magnet that was only positive it would be a round field pattern. But if you had a bar magnet it would form the classic figure eight of magnetic fields and therefore not be 'spherical'? http://www.windows2universe.org/spaceweather/images/bar_magnet_correct.gif
Slashdot Mirror
On the other hand, in a few short years we've gone from picoseconds to 16 seconds.
I wasn't in any way responding to the specifics of this case. And I very clearly stated that videoing law enforcement was an important supervision. You're completely misrepresenting my statements.
n fact, make felony crimes by police officers equivalent to laws that double sentences for crimes committed with a gun. They have a gun, and if they committed and are convicted of a crime, what's the difference?
If you make every crime a police officer a felony with a weapon you're neglecting the fact that police officers are required to carry a weapon as part of their duties. I want armed police officers. And we call on Police officers to carry out borderline unethical behavior on a daily basis.
It's important to hold law enforcement accountable and I think video is a good first step. But I also think it's important to point out that law enforcement is by design in a precarious position legally and we have to make allowances (such as carrying a weapon at all times and authorized to use it) in order for them to perform the job we've demanded of them as citizens.
Now let's take your average two hypothetical loosley based on "Fracked" episodes of a "Big Budget" show like Battlestar Galactica.
Unique sets for 2 episodes:
(Amortized over 73 episodes, 2 miniseries episodes and 2 films):
Redressed with different props
Just because there happens to be some hallways doesn't disprove my point. When I say "Starship Hallways" I mean 95% of the film takes place in a hallway that can be redressed to look like new places. Take Star Gate Universe. They have a couple of rooms but a large portion of the show is people walking back and forth across redressed sections of the same hallway. Or they're in an empty forest. Or a forest with some tents. You only have to build a couple sets and you're good for an entire season.
Now let's look at Star Wars A New Hope (from memory so I apologize for missing your favorite shots):
Runtime 123 minutes. Approximately 2 episodes.
Fan films are *NOT MADE* for under $20k. They're made for hundreds of thousands of dollars in donated time.
You can bet your ass the industry is going to be charging out the whazoo for them. Those people need to eat, drink and be merry like yourself. I'll happily work for free on a Star Wars live action TV show when all of the grocers, plumbers, gas station attendants and other viewers of my work start giving me free products and services as well.
The reason people charge up the Whazoo is because it costs a lot of money. One my largest pet peeves is when people make independent films where dozens or hundreds of people donate their time, money and resources and then the producers turn around and brag about how little movies can be made for.
It's like a homeless person claiming that restaurants charge ridiculous funds, after all "I was able to eat for an entire month for $2, no wonder the economy is tanking if everyone else pays hundreds of dollars a month for food."
They reached 2.8km according to this article [ing.dk] (in Danish).
So... 2.8% of the way there. Does that mean they need to build a rocket 50x bigger? I was really excited about the idea of a minimalist rocket shuttle with the sole intent of getting someone up to 100+ km
But it's not terribly encouraging when the current design can't even reach a Cessna.
Put more succintly: copyright is a legal entitlement, not a moral one.
A copyright might not intrinsically assign a moral entitlement... but that doesn't it can't overlap.
If I were to spend a long time working on a book and I let you read it but you OCR'ed it and started printing hundreds of thousands of copies without paying me for the right then I think I would be right in feeling morally wronged at your exploitation of my work.
I'm not going to defend the police officers in this case. And a large number of them are assholes and criminals and they were before they joined the police force so it wasn't a case of a "hard life" toughening them. But in defense of law enforcement they are exposed to an unprecedented level of douche bagery by scum bags on a daily basis. And not people speeding I mean real anti-social dicks who deserve to serve life sentences themselves for the betterment of society. And the only way to stop crime is to do many of the things that we convict and imprison people for. Arresting someone if you aren't a police officer would be kidnapping. If a speeder simply could escape by driving 10 mph over the speed limit and the cop never being able to catch up then it would be all but impossible to enforce speed limit laws.
There's a certain level of hypocrisy and contradiction that is intrinsic to their jobs. And we require them to walk that tight rope between doing their jobs and infringing civil rights. So I do think to some degree we have to award them some leniency when they legitimately make an honest mistake. But I do support laws that record officers doing their jobs.
And while there are situations where I wouldn't want someone recording on the street I think there should be an official record. I once gave a witness report for a felony assault. "Someone" walked up and started asking questions and trying to get close to record me and the officer. I was happy that the police officer forced the person to leave and had him escorted a good distance away since it was pretty clear that it was a friend of the person who had committed the assault--and I wasn't too anxious to have him recording me.
Well I would disagree about #3. It is "Their" network. The assumption I make when I install the Skype software is that I will be interacting in a P2P network with other Skype software users.
As the PR guy points out this allows Skype to better ensure the clients are legitimate users. It's a lot easier to spoof accounts, spam thousands of users etc. when there is no API and only a GUI interface. For instance I've never once received a spam message on Skype. I get at least one a month on other open messaging services.
If I'm a P2P hub/server then I expect that I'm facilitating skype services which I use not some spammer.
Similarly Skype also has "their" physical servers. And if they only want to use their bandwidth to facilitate customers who are seeing their ads then they should be legally able to refuse service to non-customers. They can no longer do that since they can't tell the difference between a non-customer reverse engineered client and a legacy client.
So I would say this is a different situation from something like BIOS reverse engineering in that this isn't to facilitate someone to setup a parallel and independent competing product based on the specs, it's going to be using people and Skype's computers and bandwidth to facilitate a network which might be behaving differently from what they agreed to when downloading the Skype software.
I prefer the Duke controller over the S model, or the new 360 for that matter. Just because you have tiny girl hands does not mean that some of us don't have normal sized hands.
I loved the original Xbox controller. The new one is way better than the S controller which was unusable in my opinion but there's still nothing that compares to the ergonomics of the original. I have little tiny child sized hands but it was still incredibly comfortable.
Have you been able to find what altitude they reached?
I can't seem to find that information anywhere.
Star Trek, Farscape, BSG, SGU, SG1 etc all were "Starship Corridor Shows".
90% of the show takes place in a hallway. Alternately it takes place in: A pine forest, Rock Quarry, City or Desert.
Star Wars is often in exotic and expensive locales and outside of a starship hallway.
I don't see how embedding a sanctuary episode on your website is any different than uploading it to your site and streaming it from your own servers.
I approve of this law. If you started hosting a site called "Sanctuary for Free!" and then aggregated and kept an up to date embedded video on a number of pages for every episode you're effectively streaming it yourself. The fact that you're using a 3rd party host to actually hold the bits is irellevant in my mind. Your intent is clear in providing copyrighted material to your customers.
A similar example would be to take a photo from a photographers page and post it on your own but not actually downloading and saving it to your own server. It's obvious that it's copyright infringement to use the photographer's work on your website but the fact that it's being hosted on the photographer's page is irrelevant.
You also can't sue YouTube since they're protected by safe harbor. With the existing law there is a loop hole where you can have someone upload it to YouTube (or more likely megadrive) and then stream it from their websites through yours and as long as they can't prove you uploaded it be completely innocent.
If you don't believe in copyright that's one thing. But if you accept the notion of copyright being a valid then this is a common sense definition of copyright infringement.
The one exception I would make is the linking rule. I don't think links should be banned since that's freedom of speech and no copyrighted content is within your website. And someone could trick you by changing their innocuous page into an infringing page. Also you might link to the NYTimes but they might have accidentally posted a photo they don't have rights to in which case without intent to cause infringement you might run afoul the law.
Frames pose an interesting question though. I would say illegal. If the primary website is still yours but you have a frame with youtube in it I would consider that "embedded". Ditto with CSS boxes or other such overlays. Pop-Ups I suppose would have to be acceptable since they're just a link.
Nonsense. We have jay-walking laws but they usually aren't enforced. That doesn't mean you couldn't cite someone who pulled a particularly egregious instance that endangered people.
Governing outside your borders. Like what the US is doing in Afghanistan.
The people in this instance being taxed are California citizens living in California. Hardly outside of California's borders.
These residents are already required to pay these taxes.
I like this quote.
"Get the state entangled in the messy task of regulating the Internet."
In other words the messy task of... governing. Welcome to government. Your job as a legislator is to solve the messy problems of regulating business, commerce and citizens.
I think ReadyDrive has failed mostly because it was left to the drive controller to handle the caching.
My understanding is that with Win8 they're moving the logic to the OS and divorcing the hardware from the equation freeing you to buy any old spinning medium and any old fast SSD/Raid to act as your cache.
I like this idea since I can 'upgrade' my existing drives to ReadyDrive by just buying a SSD and I can still have my multiple disks but just the one SSD between them.
I hear rumblings that Windows 8 is going to finally solve this once and for all at the OS level. Designate a drive as a cache drive and it'll fill it up with frequently used files and the current cache. Then when you go into standby it can just dump all of your RAM to the SSD. Start back up and it reads off the SSD.
I like the Pay by the Month plans because I decided to buy my phone and I get a discount.
The only problem with the T-Mobile plan is that he wants roaming 3G on an iPhone and the iPhone will only be edge on T-Mobile.
These things are ridiculously expensive and virtually never pay for themselves -- ever.
The problem with this mindset is that it only measures ticket sales. If you make travel between cities incredibly fast then you open up all kinds of new business opportunities and larger efficiencies.
There is certainly a need to balance cost/benefit but too often we only balance direct costs vs direct benefit while ignoring the larger returns that result.
Picture for a moment Broadband internet. If a couple of universities needed to move large files then it wouldn't make sense to lay fiber optic lines across the country--you could just overnight fedex them. But once you do lay fiber to everybody suddenly you can teleconference, you can have movies delivered to the home, you can create an entire entertainment sector where people play MMOs etc etc...
When I was in highschool I had to plead with my parents to get internet. And then a second phone line. And then broadband. Now thanks to what I mostly learned on the internet I have a high paying job. It was a great investment that they made--but not one necessarily that looked like it should pay itself off. I mostly wanted high-speed admittedly to play games. As a gaming connection it was a complete money loser. But it opened up my world and from that I found unintended consequences.
Conservatives tend to be the ones who always bemoan the unintended consequences of market intervention. But for some reason everyone seems to believe that there can only be negative unintended consequences.
Probably, but only because we invested in the R&D to make this a reality.
It would be like saying that we shouldn't bother with developing new CPUs since the ones in 10 years will be 10x faster.
Nothing drives innovation faster than demand for what's currently available.
I agree. This "A Windows machine will be pwned in less than 30 seconds" is complete and utter bullshit.
I've never taken any precautions when setting up a PC and I've plugged it into the internet while installing windows without any additional firewalls and I've NEVER had a computer automagically compromised without executing something or clicking a compromised link.
Anything less than a full duplicate wouldn't function as a simulation, and a full duplicate wouldn't function as a model (because it would give you no more insight than the identical original.
Yes and no. It does offer something though that we can't do to a real human brain: Kill it. Over and Over and Over again.
You certainly start getting into philosophical problems but imagine if you took a slice of your brain and ran a simulation for 10 minutes in a perfectly realized virtual world (or a world that explicitly told your brain to accept as perfect). You could subtly change a person's responses to you to see how you react based on different stimuli. Then wipe it. Reset it to the exact same state and do it again.
Now you can start doing really exciting things with this exact duplicate. Since this simulation is a total simulation of all the atomic and sub-atomic interactions on a computer you can do things like insert break points. Freeze time and know the exact state of every atom. You can run difference splits between two moments of a conversation.
This is the sort of insight that would lead to accurate modeling.
A big part of learning how a system works it to strip it down to its core essentials. Usually 95% of something is just superfluous support framework. With a virtual brain you could start gutting the systems without concern since killing it can be 'undone'. Imagine a computer algorithm which ran a conversation but completely randomly eliminated 1,000 neurons every time. Just put a condition on the test that any time the conditions fail --say maybe stammering -- then you do another random test with only 500 removed. And so on and so forth until the test succeeds. Without actually understanding *why* the simulation works you can randomly dramatically narrow your focus.
Is it ethical? Well it'll be an interesting conversation we'll have when we start. Or at least I hope we do. I'm actually pretty concerned we'll create a conscious entity and not realize it. We might end up committing genocide on new sentient life forms.
So, makes more sense now?
Mayyyybe...?
So if something has a north/south polarity in magnetism we say it has a strong "Magnetic Dipole Moment"? Or more simply I would using my non-physicist vocabulary say it has a distinct Magnetic Polarity. Magnetic Moment = Amount of polarity?
So even though the electron obviously has an average electric charge some theories think it might actually be the product of a slightly + in addition to being mostly - field?
But this study found that there isn't any duality to the charge; it's to the best of our measurements completely singularly charged and therefore has no polarity or shape?
I'm getting thrown by "Bipole Moment" since I don't know what that means but I feel like it's important to your explanation. :D
I'm imagining a magnetic field in my head. If you could create a magnet that was only positive it would be a round field pattern. But if you had a bar magnet it would form the classic figure eight of magnetic fields and therefore not be 'spherical'?
http://www.windows2universe.org/spaceweather/images/bar_magnet_correct.gif
Am I understanding you correctly?
You make it sound like streaming solutions can't update their software.