#include <stdio.h> main() { printf("This is very naive. People don't have access to\n \"truth.\" All we have access to is biased interpretation.\n The interpreter with the most power determines which is\n the favored interpretation. This is the basis of history\n and politics. It sounds to me like you need to read your\n Roman history."); }
It's all about speeding things up for most people -- yes, there are some who won't benefit, but they likely won't be worse off.
Except that they likely will be worse off. With these machines, they will certainly be pulled aside for the false positive, whereas before they were randomly selected. I'm not against this technology, because it offers the promise of better security. But let's not kid ourselves.
I thought carrying an unloaded pistol in your checked baggage was legal anyway. That might have changed since that fateful day, September 11th, 2001, when thousands of Americans lost their lives in the single biggest terrorist attack against the US mainland. I haven't travelled since before that monumental event, September 11th, 2001, when the whole world went topsy-turvy and everything changed.
And what is a telephoto lens going to capture? A stationary rocket on a blue background? I'd rather watch paint dry. Or NHRA drag for that matter. At least something happens in NHRA.
This isn't flamebait. The logistics necessary for interesting camera work are going to be impossible. Would you really watch a show featuring two shrinking dots? I personally wouldn't care enough to be interested in which one shrinks the fastest.
The "patriot" act was around for at least 4 years before 9-11 because the drug enforcement people got tired of not being able to use that wonderful CIA installed intel base. The CIA knows who's smuggling what around the bays.. and can use illegal, unconstitutional means to make sure they're not plotting attacks.. That of course means their agents have first hand knowladge of "where the boddies are burried" for many crime bosses... but they can't tell because the info was obtained illegally... "Patriot" was all about a giant grab for that information so more "normal" crimes could be enforced from the CIA's extreme measures to get intel.
Interesting and insightful. Of course, I already knew that LEO was liasing with the CIA before 9/11 for narcotics crimes. But I hadn't heard the relationship phrased in such a way before.
Documents are read sequentiall when that's all we've got.
You misunderstood. The sentences, paragraphs, sections, etc. within a document are read in sequence. Google lets you jump between documents easily, but that's contrary to the zzStructures goal -- which is to make useful documents from a large body of fragments with little redundancy and with no context switching. If a zzStructure backend were implemented, you wouldn't need to skip any documents, because the document generated by your query would answer all of your questions.
What you're describing is kind of pointless unless you're doing SEO. Documents are read sequentially, after all. The Holy Grail of ontological/semantic structure is the zzStructure. Instead of making a "web page" the fundamental unit of information content on the web, you make semantically categorized fragments (sentences, paragraphs, etc) the fundamental unit. Then you use server-side scripting to parse a request and apply rules to the semantic categorizations to build a single authoritative non-redundant document from the fragments.
I'm working on a project like this right now, but I can't say much about it. The main difficulty is developing a semantic ontology to work with and designing algorithms that produce readable text from fragments. The material I work with is naturally broken up into sections, so I can afford some discontinuities.
That's not the notion of an ontology TFA refers to. Something like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ontology_(computer_sc ience) would be better. The notions are related, but the second drops the metaphysical baggage and just fixes a language of categorization.
The CIA couldn't legally spy on Americans on American soil before the Patriot Act. Then again, their only oversight is the President, so I wouldn't be suprised if plenty of undisclosed shennanigans have gone on.
To be honest, the NSA doesn't scare me as much as the FBI and CIA. In fact, they seem pretty benign. Keep in mind that they're a military agency, not a law enforcement agency. They don't really care about our morals or trying to discredit us when our politics conflict with the Administration's. They care about national security, and accidental phone taps would only lower their signal-to-noise ratio.
In theory it does, but in practice, the 4th is pretty weak in that situation. Often, the cops will ask if they can search your car. If you say no, they'll hold you there until a canine unit is dispatched to sniff around the outside of your car. You should be free to go if the canine doesn't find anything, but this depends on the whims of the cop. It's pretty easy to intentionally misinterpret a dog. And if the dog "finds" something, the cop has probable cause and can search your car.
I personally have plenty of time on my hands, so I wouldn't mind wasting a cop's time. But if you're busy, I can see why you'd want to waive your 4th Amendment rights.
I was responding to suggestions that the map is a part of the public domain because an organization had purchased rights. No such thing had taken place.
Interesting. I didn't make that suggestion.
I quote you: "it would be theirs to put in the public domain IF THEY SO WISHED." Apparently, the aggreived party did not so wish. End of story.
Indeed, the MTA did not wish to do so. That is outrageous, considering that the purpose of the maps is to disseminate the information they contain and that the MTA is not a for-profit operation.
I find it funny that none of the deeply offended posters have any idea if the owners of the map rights are public, private, or subject to having every property passed into public domain immediately upon purchase of said property.
You're an idiot. Provide evidence of my "deep offense." In particular, find a factual error in any of my posts. Also, you're an idiot: the MTA owns the copyright or else would not threaten to sue. This implies that the maps were made for hire.
sorry, but if the New York Transit people hired me and my firm to produce a subway map for them, our contract would grant rights to the transit organization, not everyone curently paying taxes in the US.
Then you wouldn't get the contract. Do you even know what "work-for-hire" means? The hiring party would own the copyright in such a situation. Thus it would be theirs to put in the public domain if they so wished.
While you may think that everything paid by taxes should belong to you personally, consider that while roads are paid out of taxes and usage fees, you don't own them in the sense that you have the right to use them as you please. You buy a house, you can use it as you please (even then, within some basic guidelines). You pay taxes that builds a school, you will get arrested for trespassing if you try to enter it at will. Not many people would argue that charging people with trespassing for breaking into a public school is wrong. Paying your taxes doesn't buy you rights to use the tax-purchased properties at your discretion.
Slashdot Mirror
Your "No" indicates a desire to contradict me, but the rest of your post only solidifies my point.
Yes, thank you. People are complaining because suing a minor is wrong.
No, it's not. My eyes are bleeding.
Didn't Hume disprove it though?
Except that they likely will be worse off. With these machines, they will certainly be pulled aside for the false positive, whereas before they were randomly selected. I'm not against this technology, because it offers the promise of better security. But let's not kid ourselves.
I thought carrying an unloaded pistol in your checked baggage was legal anyway. That might have changed since that fateful day, September 11th, 2001, when thousands of Americans lost their lives in the single biggest terrorist attack against the US mainland. I haven't travelled since before that monumental event, September 11th, 2001, when the whole world went topsy-turvy and everything changed.
GHOSTBUSTERS!
Here.
And what is a telephoto lens going to capture? A stationary rocket on a blue background? I'd rather watch paint dry. Or NHRA drag for that matter. At least something happens in NHRA.
This isn't flamebait. The logistics necessary for interesting camera work are going to be impossible. Would you really watch a show featuring two shrinking dots? I personally wouldn't care enough to be interested in which one shrinks the fastest.
Interesting and insightful. Of course, I already knew that LEO was liasing with the CIA before 9/11 for narcotics crimes. But I hadn't heard the relationship phrased in such a way before.
Because you can't just drag some Applications over. Those installers put files in directories a normal user can't touch.
You misunderstood. The sentences, paragraphs, sections, etc. within a document are read in sequence. Google lets you jump between documents easily, but that's contrary to the zzStructures goal -- which is to make useful documents from a large body of fragments with little redundancy and with no context switching. If a zzStructure backend were implemented, you wouldn't need to skip any documents, because the document generated by your query would answer all of your questions.
I'm working on a project like this right now, but I can't say much about it. The main difficulty is developing a semantic ontology to work with and designing algorithms that produce readable text from fragments. The material I work with is naturally broken up into sections, so I can afford some discontinuities.
That's not the notion of an ontology TFA refers to. Something like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ontology_(computer_sc ience) would be better. The notions are related, but the second drops the metaphysical baggage and just fixes a language of categorization.
Do you need a hug?
I had some trouble adapetting to your attrocious spelling, but then I learned to love the bomb.
The CIA couldn't legally spy on Americans on American soil before the Patriot Act. Then again, their only oversight is the President, so I wouldn't be suprised if plenty of undisclosed shennanigans have gone on.
The CIA, on the other hand...
I personally have plenty of time on my hands, so I wouldn't mind wasting a cop's time. But if you're busy, I can see why you'd want to waive your 4th Amendment rights.
I was kind of hoping there was a fuck off and die command. Imagine my disappointment when man foad returned "No manual entry for foad." :-(
Interesting. I didn't make that suggestion.
I quote you: "it would be theirs to put in the public domain IF THEY SO WISHED." Apparently, the aggreived party did not so wish. End of story.
Indeed, the MTA did not wish to do so. That is outrageous, considering that the purpose of the maps is to disseminate the information they contain and that the MTA is not a for-profit operation.
I find it funny that none of the deeply offended posters have any idea if the owners of the map rights are public, private, or subject to having every property passed into public domain immediately upon purchase of said property.
You're an idiot. Provide evidence of my "deep offense." In particular, find a factual error in any of my posts. Also, you're an idiot: the MTA owns the copyright or else would not threaten to sue. This implies that the maps were made for hire.
Then you wouldn't get the contract. Do you even know what "work-for-hire" means? The hiring party would own the copyright in such a situation. Thus it would be theirs to put in the public domain if they so wished.
While you may think that everything paid by taxes should belong to you personally, consider that while roads are paid out of taxes and usage fees, you don't own them in the sense that you have the right to use them as you please. You buy a house, you can use it as you please (even then, within some basic guidelines). You pay taxes that builds a school, you will get arrested for trespassing if you try to enter it at will. Not many people would argue that charging people with trespassing for breaking into a public school is wrong. Paying your taxes doesn't buy you rights to use the tax-purchased properties at your discretion.
...
Irrelevant, and a red herring.