I think the problem with privately owned flying cars is they could theoretically be converted into privately owned cruise missiles. If the car is fully robotic, then some enterprising hacker out there will inevitably "jailbreak" the control software so the car can be tinkered with. Then some enterprising terrorist/revolutionary/insurgent/freedom fighter will just use that jailbreak-ing software to program the car to smash into a building. Load up the cockpit with something flammable and/or explosive, and you really have a mess. Have a following of 10,000 other enterprising terrorists/revolutionaries/insurgents/freedom fighters do the same with their cars and you practically have a WMD. They could simultaneously launch all 10,000 into NYC and burn the whole city to the ground.
An M16 or even a modern M4 isn't going to get you very far. Better to have a couple of Vulcan Cannons, and a military gunner to operate them. The piracy problem will go away pretty fast once the pirates start being vaporised.
You're right, the migration from cable TV to cable internet is at the very heart of this issue. You don't hear DSL providers championing the pay per bit idea, they have all (Verizon, AT&T, etc) moved on to being cell providers and 3G (where they can charge pay per bit without anyone making a fuss because its "new"). These cable companies see the writing on the wall: that cable TV will be all but dead in a decade or so, but they don't have a plan to replace that lost revenue. The real issue is isn't that their networks aren't able to handle moving additional data, it their fear of not being able to move additional dollars.
Well malware aside, its PS CS4, which is a piece of garbage especially on the Mac where it doesn't run in 64 bit mode. All Adobe did was repackage CS3 with a a few new nearly-useless bells and whistles, certainly not worth the upgrade from CS3. What Adobe really needs to do is pick back through their code and rewrite the bits that haven't been updated since it was written to run on a damn Motorola chipped Mac Quatra.
Ok, ok I'm being a little hard on Adobe calling CS4 garbage, but I know a few guys in the company and I'm kinda paraphrasing them. I really do feel that Adobe needs to start going through their old code and update it, rather then just keep adding on bells and whistles. For example: I was recently doing an illustration where I needed to create exploding schrapnel, or a sort of firework effect. To create this painted I painted a ring of ramdon dots on a transparent layer and used the radial blur filter to make them burst outward. The problem was the radial blur filter hasn't been updated since 1996 (at least). It cannot preview before being applied, it cannot be applied anywhere but the center of the document (I had to create a new document to apply the effect dead center, then copy the output into the original), and it takes forever (about 30 minutes for a relatively low-rez image) and runs my processors up to as close to 100% as the OS will give it. Compare it to any of the modern blur filters: all of which preview, can be applied anywhere, and run quickly without bashing the CPU(s). It feels like it the older filters and tools run no better on my 3GHz Dual Core, then they ran on a 33Mhz Quatra back in the 90s.
Photoshop is a wonderful program in general, but there are tons of tools that need to be modernized, and Adobe seems content to just keep piling on semi-worthless junk. Sorry go off on a tangent, but its been a while since I've seen an Adobe related thread and needed to vent.
Cocaine doesn't really produce what's considered "physical withdrawal". Psychological withdrawal certainly and pronounced cravings, but physical withdrawal in the traditional sense is limited to alcohol, opiates, benzodiazepines, and barbiturates. In order for physical withdrawal to occur the drug has to act on the GABA system, whereas stimulants like: cocaine, amphetamine, caffeine, and nicotine act on the dopamine and serotonine systems. That isn't to say that stimulants are not addictive, just that they don't cause classic withdrawal symptoms.
Now that we know more about how the brain functions, we can point to certain physical changes that occur within the brain when you expose it to dopamine/serotonine acting drugs, and can make a case that those changes cause a "physical withdrawal", but it's not the really the same thing. Complicating the theory of dopamine/serotonine drug withdrawal are studies showing you can also find the same changes brought about by other means, such as exercise or competition.
It's difficult to discuss addiction because it such a socially loaded issue. Physical withdrawal, while unpleasant (and sometimes even potentially fatal) is not the primary cause or indicator of addiction. It can be an impediment to remission and recovery, but it's fairly well understood and easily dealt with medically. The primary cause of addiction and addiction relapse is conditioning (with its resulting cravings). As this study kinda suggests, you can become addicted to anything (even WoW) so long as your brain expects to receive a reward for a specific behavior. While drugs short circuit the reward pathway (and may therefor be more potentially addictive then WoW) you still have to take the drug, thus establishing a behavior-reward correlation.
I used to get those playing Street Fighter 2 Hyper Fighting on the SNES. First you get a blister, then it pops, then you tear away the skin underneath until it bleeds. I tried everything to keep playing, wrapping my fingers in multiple bandages, tape, plastic wrap. Nothing completely worked. I guess I was about 11 or twelve then. I'm 28 now and still have a slight callous on my left thumb. I guess Nintendo thumb can have PERMANENT REPERCUSSIONS.
I'm not sure if I would agree that either Quake or Mortal Kombat are actually violent games (though I know this is a little out there). They are both certainly gory, but I'm not sure gore = violence. Way back when, I had a discussion with a friend about the difference between violence and "action" in film. I made the argument that most "violent" action movies are actually more choreography and dance then they are violence, even if they are gory. I referred to it as "dances with guns".
To bring it back to video games, take Mortal Kombat. In Mortal Kombat you can graphically disembowel your opponent, but it is more of a flourish, an exclamation point at the match, a demonstration of skill. The character isn't shown suffering, comes back the next round, and the player doesn't really receive much of a sadistic thrill. Compare this to the original Perfect Dark, or GTA IV where you have the option of slowly torturing the NPCs to death, and they stay dead.
To take it a step further, imagine a game based on the movie Hostel (which I would argue is an extremely violent movie) where the object of the game is to earn points and unlock levels by torturing your victim to death in ever more imaginative and gruesome ways. That would be what I would consider to be violent as its intent would be to arouse sadistic impulses and draw pleasure from the dominance over another person, or pleasure from causing them to suffer. Another example of a violent game could be a puzzle type game which casts the player as an WW2 SS officer, who's job it is to exterminate the greatest amount of prisoners with the least amount of resources; an act which would require the player to either insulate himself/herself to the deed being done, or take pleasure in the suffering he/she inflicts.
If you compare the above idea to Quake or Halo, where players just hope around and blast each other, I think you can see the difference. While Halo might awaken tendencies for competition or aggression, its more akin to those awakened by sports such as soccer or football, no matter if the opponent splatters or not when defeated. I wouldn't hesitate to let my (hypothetical) teenager play a game like Halo, Quake, or Mortal Kombat, but I might have reservations if I saw them playing the hypothetical "Hostel" or "Holocaust" I outlined above. The former rewards emotions and behavior that are healthy and useful in society, the later would train them to be actually violent, or sadistic (or maybe would actually be an outlet for natural sadistic impulses, I defer to the experts).
I don't know if the battery is really an issue for the iPhone. I've been using cell phones and smart phones since 1996 and I've never had a phone that outlasted its battery. I'm more worried about the screen going on the iphone (I've killed 4 phones and its always the screen), and the iPhone has a big vulnerable screen.
I'll did get an iPhone 3G, and honestly I have to say I'm pretty impressed with it. I don't think dismissing a great user interface and pleasing design as just "bling-bling" is fair. I agree with you that in many ways the iPhone is inferior to other smart phones, but many smart phones fall well short of the iPhone in other ways.
Well given that everyone will eventually get sick and die, everyone has bad genes. Its not a question of weakness (though obviously someone born with handicaps would be a liability) but of expense. You sould screen people and weed out everyone except those that have genetic predispositions for diseases that kill you quickly (cheaply) or that there is no approved treatment for (so you can deny coverage).
Those who take the worst care of themselves and have the worst family histories are ultimately the best customers, and fortunately destructive behaviors are statistically well correlated to family history so you can screen for both from childhood. An alcoholic who genetically lacks the enzymes to process alcohol would be good, but they might not develop the condition until later in life --at which time your competitor might have already picked them up as a "life long" client. Far better would be to cull the areas of your country with high rates of illegal drug availability for persons with a familiar history of drug addiction. Heroin/cocaine addicts often die very suddenly.
I'm not sure I would call that good genes. Without having too much to go on, it sounds like you work out and are generally conscious of your health. I think "good genes" tends to refer to the inherent ability to be in shape without doing anything at all.
I once dated a girl that had what I would consider "good genes". Over the 3 years I knew her she never exercised in anyway, ate whatever she wanted usually including at least on quarter pound cheeseburger and fries per day, and had a hard time keeping her weight over 110 pounds (in fact sometimes she had a hard time keeping over 100). She wasn't skinny or sickly looking either. She had great muscle tone and err, other things you wouldn't expect to find on a girl that thin. I suppose a lot of people have that when they are young, but her mother looks the same and is equally inactive, so I have a feeling it runs in the family.
Oh absolutely. I wasn't trying to imply the tech wasn't available, just that the operators would not likely to be diligent or competent enough, in many cases. Its a pretty difficult job to do, you're doing a repetitive task, in a hostile environment, interacting with people who fear and despise you. I imagine a TSA shift feels pretty long; and fatigue takes its toll.
You know, if you put C4 in a working laptop, I really kinda doubt that the TSA would catch it. Built right, it would just look like a chip or drive on an x-ray.
The only way they might, would be one of those "random searchers". If you have "SSSS" printed on your boarding pass, they pull you aside to more thoroughly search you. Happened to me twice, scared the crap out of me the first time as I had spent the night before indulging in something that wasn't quite legal, and they didn't bother to explain it was just a random search. I was petrified that they had somehow detected some residue of it, but my paranoia was unjustified.
All the searches really amount to is a somewhat humiliating, yet laughably ineffective pat-down (they don't go near you genitals, which is the first place any one trying to hide anything hides it). They also use a device that searches for chemical residue of known explosives, which might catch the C4, depending on how well its installed. I would imagine that if it was laminated in a professional factory, it might still pass.
Not good enough, there could be an accomplice, one not poisoned by the spikes, and aware and able to avoid them. Better to have a series of passwords and biometric data that has to be entered in a reasonable time frame or an ounce or two of C4 embedded in the laptop will detonate. That way confidential data is destroyed and the intruder ins neutralized. Might not work with Macs though, too slim.
I wish I hadn't spent my mod points, so that I could mod you down. "No." contributes nothing to the discussion at all. It simply reeks of arrogance and possibly ignorance.
I'm not sure. Maybe its a matter of how often your eye has to move to take in all the information. One way or another, the theater feels lower def then watching it on a 50" HD screen.
I was in Best Buy returning some Christmas presents, and I sat down and watched a Blu-Ray copy of the new Pirates of the Caribbean. I sat there for maybe 5 minutes while I screwed with the audio settings and tried out different speakers. During that time, no less then 3 different people walked up and said "that looks fake" or "that looks so real that it looks fake". They were right, the quality of the picture was so high that you could see the every little unintentional gesture the actors made, every little imperfection in the props. Instead of suspending your disbelief, the format makes it painfully clear that your watching a bunch of dudes in costume recite lines. Instead of the Hollywood "larger then life" feeling, you got "I'm watching a bad play" (not that I have anything against plays, I just prefer to see them in person).
It seems to me that people care more about content portability then they care about image quality. For instance, my mother can't live without her Tivo, and I can't live without my server. I don't think she is even considering moving to HD, and I certainly won't be until I buy a player accidently.
All this talk of rifles and baseball bats flying around. I had no idea/. had so many internet tough guys. Its Times Square, the Mecca of ads, there are already thousands of lights, speakers, tour buses, car horns, annoying tourists, cameras, smelly roasted nuts, naked cowboys, salsa music blaring from cars, rap music blaring from cars, guys shoving flyers in your face... the list goes on. This is a novel effect being used in a creative way in an area that is renowned for novel advertising. They aren't going to pop up everywhere, for the same reason that you don't have regular speakers everywhere, its annoying, and already illegal in most places.
Slashdot Mirror
I think the problem with privately owned flying cars is they could theoretically be converted into privately owned cruise missiles. If the car is fully robotic, then some enterprising hacker out there will inevitably "jailbreak" the control software so the car can be tinkered with. Then some enterprising terrorist/revolutionary/insurgent/freedom fighter will just use that jailbreak-ing software to program the car to smash into a building. Load up the cockpit with something flammable and/or explosive, and you really have a mess. Have a following of 10,000 other enterprising terrorists/revolutionaries/insurgents/freedom fighters do the same with their cars and you practically have a WMD. They could simultaneously launch all 10,000 into NYC and burn the whole city to the ground.
I'm imagining something like a burning parachute. ;-)
Between the lithium and the cocaine, Bolivia may be poised to be the most energetic nation on the planet.
An M16 or even a modern M4 isn't going to get you very far. Better to have a couple of Vulcan Cannons, and a military gunner to operate them. The piracy problem will go away pretty fast once the pirates start being vaporised.
I didn't RTFA yet, but "x-ray laser" screams "soon to be defense contract". I wonder what they will blow up with it?
You're right, the migration from cable TV to cable internet is at the very heart of this issue. You don't hear DSL providers championing the pay per bit idea, they have all (Verizon, AT&T, etc) moved on to being cell providers and 3G (where they can charge pay per bit without anyone making a fuss because its "new"). These cable companies see the writing on the wall: that cable TV will be all but dead in a decade or so, but they don't have a plan to replace that lost revenue. The real issue is isn't that their networks aren't able to handle moving additional data, it their fear of not being able to move additional dollars.
Well malware aside, its PS CS4, which is a piece of garbage especially on the Mac where it doesn't run in 64 bit mode. All Adobe did was repackage CS3 with a a few new nearly-useless bells and whistles, certainly not worth the upgrade from CS3. What Adobe really needs to do is pick back through their code and rewrite the bits that haven't been updated since it was written to run on a damn Motorola chipped Mac Quatra.
Ok, ok I'm being a little hard on Adobe calling CS4 garbage, but I know a few guys in the company and I'm kinda paraphrasing them. I really do feel that Adobe needs to start going through their old code and update it, rather then just keep adding on bells and whistles. For example: I was recently doing an illustration where I needed to create exploding schrapnel, or a sort of firework effect. To create this painted I painted a ring of ramdon dots on a transparent layer and used the radial blur filter to make them burst outward. The problem was the radial blur filter hasn't been updated since 1996 (at least). It cannot preview before being applied, it cannot be applied anywhere but the center of the document (I had to create a new document to apply the effect dead center, then copy the output into the original), and it takes forever (about 30 minutes for a relatively low-rez image) and runs my processors up to as close to 100% as the OS will give it. Compare it to any of the modern blur filters: all of which preview, can be applied anywhere, and run quickly without bashing the CPU(s). It feels like it the older filters and tools run no better on my 3GHz Dual Core, then they ran on a 33Mhz Quatra back in the 90s.
Photoshop is a wonderful program in general, but there are tons of tools that need to be modernized, and Adobe seems content to just keep piling on semi-worthless junk. Sorry go off on a tangent, but its been a while since I've seen an Adobe related thread and needed to vent.
Cocaine doesn't really produce what's considered "physical withdrawal". Psychological withdrawal certainly and pronounced cravings, but physical withdrawal in the traditional sense is limited to alcohol, opiates, benzodiazepines, and barbiturates. In order for physical withdrawal to occur the drug has to act on the GABA system, whereas stimulants like: cocaine, amphetamine, caffeine, and nicotine act on the dopamine and serotonine systems. That isn't to say that stimulants are not addictive, just that they don't cause classic withdrawal symptoms.
Now that we know more about how the brain functions, we can point to certain physical changes that occur within the brain when you expose it to dopamine/serotonine acting drugs, and can make a case that those changes cause a "physical withdrawal", but it's not the really the same thing. Complicating the theory of dopamine/serotonine drug withdrawal are studies showing you can also find the same changes brought about by other means, such as exercise or competition.
It's difficult to discuss addiction because it such a socially loaded issue. Physical withdrawal, while unpleasant (and sometimes even potentially fatal) is not the primary cause or indicator of addiction. It can be an impediment to remission and recovery, but it's fairly well understood and easily dealt with medically. The primary cause of addiction and addiction relapse is conditioning (with its resulting cravings). As this study kinda suggests, you can become addicted to anything (even WoW) so long as your brain expects to receive a reward for a specific behavior. While drugs short circuit the reward pathway (and may therefor be more potentially addictive then WoW) you still have to take the drug, thus establishing a behavior-reward correlation.
I used to get those playing Street Fighter 2 Hyper Fighting on the SNES. First you get a blister, then it pops, then you tear away the skin underneath until it bleeds. I tried everything to keep playing, wrapping my fingers in multiple bandages, tape, plastic wrap. Nothing completely worked. I guess I was about 11 or twelve then. I'm 28 now and still have a slight callous on my left thumb. I guess Nintendo thumb can have PERMANENT REPERCUSSIONS.
I can kink your ass at Mortal Kombat, FOOL! At least MK1 or MK2... the others were after my time... FOOL!
I'm not sure if I would agree that either Quake or Mortal Kombat are actually violent games (though I know this is a little out there). They are both certainly gory, but I'm not sure gore = violence. Way back when, I had a discussion with a friend about the difference between violence and "action" in film. I made the argument that most "violent" action movies are actually more choreography and dance then they are violence, even if they are gory. I referred to it as "dances with guns".
To bring it back to video games, take Mortal Kombat. In Mortal Kombat you can graphically disembowel your opponent, but it is more of a flourish, an exclamation point at the match, a demonstration of skill. The character isn't shown suffering, comes back the next round, and the player doesn't really receive much of a sadistic thrill. Compare this to the original Perfect Dark, or GTA IV where you have the option of slowly torturing the NPCs to death, and they stay dead.
To take it a step further, imagine a game based on the movie Hostel (which I would argue is an extremely violent movie) where the object of the game is to earn points and unlock levels by torturing your victim to death in ever more imaginative and gruesome ways. That would be what I would consider to be violent as its intent would be to arouse sadistic impulses and draw pleasure from the dominance over another person, or pleasure from causing them to suffer. Another example of a violent game could be a puzzle type game which casts the player as an WW2 SS officer, who's job it is to exterminate the greatest amount of prisoners with the least amount of resources; an act which would require the player to either insulate himself/herself to the deed being done, or take pleasure in the suffering he/she inflicts.
If you compare the above idea to Quake or Halo, where players just hope around and blast each other, I think you can see the difference. While Halo might awaken tendencies for competition or aggression, its more akin to those awakened by sports such as soccer or football, no matter if the opponent splatters or not when defeated. I wouldn't hesitate to let my (hypothetical) teenager play a game like Halo, Quake, or Mortal Kombat, but I might have reservations if I saw them playing the hypothetical "Hostel" or "Holocaust" I outlined above. The former rewards emotions and behavior that are healthy and useful in society, the later would train them to be actually violent, or sadistic (or maybe would actually be an outlet for natural sadistic impulses, I defer to the experts).
Well to be a janitor, you probably need experience cleaning up shit, so at least a MCSE.
"Yes, a sale has been made. Without the AT&T contract, however, you just have an over-priced iPod Touch."
The iPod Touch is actually $100 more expensive then the iPhone.
I don't know if the battery is really an issue for the iPhone. I've been using cell phones and smart phones since 1996 and I've never had a phone that outlasted its battery. I'm more worried about the screen going on the iphone (I've killed 4 phones and its always the screen), and the iPhone has a big vulnerable screen.
I'll did get an iPhone 3G, and honestly I have to say I'm pretty impressed with it. I don't think dismissing a great user interface and pleasing design as just "bling-bling" is fair. I agree with you that in many ways the iPhone is inferior to other smart phones, but many smart phones fall well short of the iPhone in other ways.
Well given that everyone will eventually get sick and die, everyone has bad genes. Its not a question of weakness (though obviously someone born with handicaps would be a liability) but of expense. You sould screen people and weed out everyone except those that have genetic predispositions for diseases that kill you quickly (cheaply) or that there is no approved treatment for (so you can deny coverage).
Those who take the worst care of themselves and have the worst family histories are ultimately the best customers, and fortunately destructive behaviors are statistically well correlated to family history so you can screen for both from childhood. An alcoholic who genetically lacks the enzymes to process alcohol would be good, but they might not develop the condition until later in life --at which time your competitor might have already picked them up as a "life long" client. Far better would be to cull the areas of your country with high rates of illegal drug availability for persons with a familiar history of drug addiction. Heroin/cocaine addicts often die very suddenly.
I'm not sure I would call that good genes. Without having too much to go on, it sounds like you work out and are generally conscious of your health. I think "good genes" tends to refer to the inherent ability to be in shape without doing anything at all.
I once dated a girl that had what I would consider "good genes". Over the 3 years I knew her she never exercised in anyway, ate whatever she wanted usually including at least on quarter pound cheeseburger and fries per day, and had a hard time keeping her weight over 110 pounds (in fact sometimes she had a hard time keeping over 100). She wasn't skinny or sickly looking either. She had great muscle tone and err, other things you wouldn't expect to find on a girl that thin. I suppose a lot of people have that when they are young, but her mother looks the same and is equally inactive, so I have a feeling it runs in the family.
Oh absolutely. I wasn't trying to imply the tech wasn't available, just that the operators would not likely to be diligent or competent enough, in many cases. Its a pretty difficult job to do, you're doing a repetitive task, in a hostile environment, interacting with people who fear and despise you. I imagine a TSA shift feels pretty long; and fatigue takes its toll.
You know, if you put C4 in a working laptop, I really kinda doubt that the TSA would catch it. Built right, it would just look like a chip or drive on an x-ray.
The only way they might, would be one of those "random searchers". If you have "SSSS" printed on your boarding pass, they pull you aside to more thoroughly search you. Happened to me twice, scared the crap out of me the first time as I had spent the night before indulging in something that wasn't quite legal, and they didn't bother to explain it was just a random search. I was petrified that they had somehow detected some residue of it, but my paranoia was unjustified.
All the searches really amount to is a somewhat humiliating, yet laughably ineffective pat-down (they don't go near you genitals, which is the first place any one trying to hide anything hides it). They also use a device that searches for chemical residue of known explosives, which might catch the C4, depending on how well its installed. I would imagine that if it was laminated in a professional factory, it might still pass.
Not good enough, there could be an accomplice, one not poisoned by the spikes, and aware and able to avoid them. Better to have a series of passwords and biometric data that has to be entered in a reasonable time frame or an ounce or two of C4 embedded in the laptop will detonate. That way confidential data is destroyed and the intruder ins neutralized. Might not work with Macs though, too slim.
I wish I hadn't spent my mod points, so that I could mod you down. "No." contributes nothing to the discussion at all. It simply reeks of arrogance and possibly ignorance.
The beauty fades and you're left with something ugly that you desperate to get rid of. That's why you have to get a new one every three years or so.
I'm not sure. Maybe its a matter of how often your eye has to move to take in all the information. One way or another, the theater feels lower def then watching it on a 50" HD screen.
I was in Best Buy returning some Christmas presents, and I sat down and watched a Blu-Ray copy of the new Pirates of the Caribbean. I sat there for maybe 5 minutes while I screwed with the audio settings and tried out different speakers. During that time, no less then 3 different people walked up and said "that looks fake" or "that looks so real that it looks fake". They were right, the quality of the picture was so high that you could see the every little unintentional gesture the actors made, every little imperfection in the props. Instead of suspending your disbelief, the format makes it painfully clear that your watching a bunch of dudes in costume recite lines. Instead of the Hollywood "larger then life" feeling, you got "I'm watching a bad play" (not that I have anything against plays, I just prefer to see them in person).
It seems to me that people care more about content portability then they care about image quality. For instance, my mother can't live without her Tivo, and I can't live without my server. I don't think she is even considering moving to HD, and I certainly won't be until I buy a player accidently.
I'm sorry, I can never keep this straight: Is Joe Sixpack a jock or a drunk? Or both?
Seriously. Its just a damn speaker.
/. had so many internet tough guys. Its Times Square, the Mecca of ads, there are already thousands of lights, speakers, tour buses, car horns, annoying tourists, cameras, smelly roasted nuts, naked cowboys, salsa music blaring from cars, rap music blaring from cars, guys shoving flyers in your face... the list goes on. This is a novel effect being used in a creative way in an area that is renowned for novel advertising. They aren't going to pop up everywhere, for the same reason that you don't have regular speakers everywhere, its annoying, and already illegal in most places.
All this talk of rifles and baseball bats flying around. I had no idea