Everyone has a legal right to it in the US anyway..
I'm sure a lot of good as well as bad things have resulted from people doing things just because they "could". If we didn't do things simply because we could, the world would be a very dull place, and we probably wouldn't have advanced very far technically.
do we really need 'home brew' for this? If you want to study this stuff, go to school for it!
Booooo..
I find this a little scary too, but if they're smart/geeky enough to even want to try this at home, don't you think they'd also take some appropriate cautionary measures? After all, the first person in the line of fire is themself if something goes wrong..
As someone else wisely pointed out, if you're tired you're still far more likely to have an accident even if you don't fall asleep. If you really want to save relatives grief and the health system a lot of work, etc, you take a break.
The Eyetracker also has applications in computer games where players could look around themselves without requiring a joystick to change their viewing direction
The only possible use for that is when you have VR goggles. It would be pointless with a TV, as every time you try to look at something, it would move out of the way..
I wasn't talking about public/private keys for DRM, I was talking about verifying sources of information (information which anyone is free to read). I also implied it would probably be possible to copy the private key if you had physical access to the device. With the Wii or an iPhone or whatever you wouldn't even need to have access to the private key to sign software, you would just need some way of making the device think that all sources are authorised.
This isn't so much about DRM as verifying the source of information. Similar technologies are involved, but it's not the same concept. DRM is about obscuring information to all but authorised users, while signing information is about making sure that an authorised source has written a message (or a driver for example), and anyone is free to read it.
Yeah. I don't know that much about security, but I think having a board on the device to digitally sign data from the drive would be better (public key cryptography type thig). At least that way you couldn't simply copy the device's signature using a program in the machine it's plugged into. If you design it right you'd have to have physical access to the internals of the device to copy its private key.
I would do things the same way, but I'm talking about websites where people actually work at/for the website. I suppose they could make money by having a store rather than being ad supported, but I don't grudge sites like that ads if it makes them some money. I block them anyway!
I think so. One situation I'm reminded of is a gf I had for a couple of years, and my brain even had her in the enemy pile during a lot of that time, for reasons that are rather silly and obviously shouldn't have even existed:p Such is the world of a seriously depressed/paranoid person. Now even with people I hardly know I try to be more open minded and optimistic. The more open and friendly you are with people the more likely they are to reciprocate anyway..
I'd say depressed people are not seeing reality clearly at all. I used to assign very pessimistic reasons to everything. Now that I try to focus on more positive possible explanations for things, I end up being right a lot of the time, and save myself needless worrying and self-deprecation. A silly but representative example would be if someone doesn't turn up to meet me at a certain time I might assume they just aren't going to show up at all rather than the obvious answer that they're just running a bit late.
I have managed to be a bit more "normal" recently. This is partially through improving my diet and getting regular exercise, which help a lot when it comes to having your body and brain chemistry function "normally", but also I have tried to improve my thought patterns to be more positive, and it does all seem to be coming together at last. Even when I get into foul moods I can still try to be logical and not let myself do anything stupid. Depressed people might think they're being realistic about their situations, but I'd say often they're really not, especially when trying to assign motivation to other people's actions.
True, but YouTube has a user base much more representative of the "general public" than Slashdot. I wasn't trying to say that Slashdotters should be deciding it either, in fact it's a bad idea letting anyone but a judge decide that a lawsuit is not worthwhile, otherwise there will be blatant crimes being unpunished all over the place.
What the hell has the quality of a city's sports team or other nebulous measure of quality got to do with whether or not you want to read a newspaper from that city? Presumably there are many crappy newspapers in NY too.
I just don't read "normal news" newspapers, so I couldn't really care less whether they want to charge or not.. if every news site started charging I don't know what I'd do, since sites like slashdot link to several news sites a day.. though in Slashdot's case the real worth is often in the actual comments rather than the stories.
I don't have a problem on the general populace voting on what the laws are, but I do have a problem with them voting which cases are worthy of a trial. That's just sidestepping the law entirely.
Well, George Lucas was actually doing a bit of that recently over powerful blue laser devices, though admittedly more for the handle design than the actual laser..
Contrary to popular perception, YouTube users are not pudgy teenagers pretending to be Star Wars action heroes, at least the majority are not. Rather, over half of them (54.5%) were in the 35-64 age bracket, according to eMarketer. And 25-34 subgroup comprised 19.1% of the total, while kids aged 12-17 made up only 12.6% of the total.
Something like "a skydive, but higher!" doesn't seem much like a trade secret though. I know there are technical challenges to be overcome, but they had already been overcome in 1959 for current world record. I don't see how the guy's suggestion is any more valuable than "how about attempting a world record bus jump by adding another bus to the end of the jump?".
Depends what kind of agreement they entered into before the talks I suppose. I don't know the relevant laws for automatic/unspoken/unwritten contracts between two parties in such a scenario. It seems like it would be a very hard business to make a living in, presenting your ideas before you are paid, with no possibility of any patents on your ideas.
I refer the poster to YouTube. Pick a video. Basically any video. Now, look at the comments. Do you really want these guys deciding what lawsuits are "worthwhile"? I think they'd actually get more ridiculous. These people are the ones that sue when they accidentally kill their dog in a microwave.
So if someone tells you to jump off a bridge, you're not allowed to do do it if they suddenly decide that no actually it was their idea and they want to keep it?
but I wouldn't bet against it being possible either.
When I said "possible", I meant "possible eventually", or "theoretically possible", I didn't mean that we would be able to accurately simulate a brain's complete thought processes in a timely fashion with current tech.
That doesn't negate anything I said. It feels free to you, but how do you know you're not just doing what you would have done anyway (even by taking part in this very conversation)? What exactly is the "free"? Does it mean that if we replayed this scenario, you'd do something else, because there is some random or otherwise external factor?
But then, what decides that random or external factor? And why do you think it makes things any more free than your current existence? All that matters is that you feel as if you have free will. Because you do, essentially. Your brain definitely make its own decisions based on appropriate input. But that doesn't mean it's not pre-determinable if you ran an accurate enough simulation. Not saying it definitely is pre-determinable with the data we can acquire with our current level of tech, but I wouldn't bet against it being possible either.
Slashdot Mirror
Everyone has a legal right to it in the US anyway..
I'm sure a lot of good as well as bad things have resulted from people doing things just because they "could". If we didn't do things simply because we could, the world would be a very dull place, and we probably wouldn't have advanced very far technically.
do we really need 'home brew' for this? If you want to study this stuff, go to school for it!
Booooo..
I find this a little scary too, but if they're smart/geeky enough to even want to try this at home, don't you think they'd also take some appropriate cautionary measures? After all, the first person in the line of fire is themself if something goes wrong..
As someone else wisely pointed out, if you're tired you're still far more likely to have an accident even if you don't fall asleep. If you really want to save relatives grief and the health system a lot of work, etc, you take a break.
The Eyetracker also has applications in computer games where players could look around themselves without requiring a joystick to change their viewing direction
The only possible use for that is when you have VR goggles. It would be pointless with a TV, as every time you try to look at something, it would move out of the way..
*facepalm* dear gods, Slashdot is finally turning into YouTube..
I wasn't talking about public/private keys for DRM, I was talking about verifying sources of information (information which anyone is free to read). I also implied it would probably be possible to copy the private key if you had physical access to the device. With the Wii or an iPhone or whatever you wouldn't even need to have access to the private key to sign software, you would just need some way of making the device think that all sources are authorised.
This isn't so much about DRM as verifying the source of information. Similar technologies are involved, but it's not the same concept. DRM is about obscuring information to all but authorised users, while signing information is about making sure that an authorised source has written a message (or a driver for example), and anyone is free to read it.
Yeah. I don't know that much about security, but I think having a board on the device to digitally sign data from the drive would be better (public key cryptography type thig). At least that way you couldn't simply copy the device's signature using a program in the machine it's plugged into. If you design it right you'd have to have physical access to the internals of the device to copy its private key.
wiredmikey writes with a story from Security Week where they admit "we're idiots who don't know anything about computing or, indeed, security"
These are the sorts of guys that get publishers to buy into moronic DRM schemes..
Well, how am I to know which is causing which when I seem to have both?
I would do things the same way, but I'm talking about websites where people actually work at/for the website. I suppose they could make money by having a store rather than being ad supported, but I don't grudge sites like that ads if it makes them some money. I block them anyway!
I think so. One situation I'm reminded of is a gf I had for a couple of years, and my brain even had her in the enemy pile during a lot of that time, for reasons that are rather silly and obviously shouldn't have even existed :p Such is the world of a seriously depressed/paranoid person. Now even with people I hardly know I try to be more open minded and optimistic. The more open and friendly you are with people the more likely they are to reciprocate anyway..
I'd say depressed people are not seeing reality clearly at all. I used to assign very pessimistic reasons to everything. Now that I try to focus on more positive possible explanations for things, I end up being right a lot of the time, and save myself needless worrying and self-deprecation. A silly but representative example would be if someone doesn't turn up to meet me at a certain time I might assume they just aren't going to show up at all rather than the obvious answer that they're just running a bit late.
I have managed to be a bit more "normal" recently. This is partially through improving my diet and getting regular exercise, which help a lot when it comes to having your body and brain chemistry function "normally", but also I have tried to improve my thought patterns to be more positive, and it does all seem to be coming together at last. Even when I get into foul moods I can still try to be logical and not let myself do anything stupid. Depressed people might think they're being realistic about their situations, but I'd say often they're really not, especially when trying to assign motivation to other people's actions.
True, but YouTube has a user base much more representative of the "general public" than Slashdot. I wasn't trying to say that Slashdotters should be deciding it either, in fact it's a bad idea letting anyone but a judge decide that a lawsuit is not worthwhile, otherwise there will be blatant crimes being unpunished all over the place.
I didn't know Google invested in Facebook? Aren't they competitors via Orkut?
And open websites will make even more money via advertising..
What the hell has the quality of a city's sports team or other nebulous measure of quality got to do with whether or not you want to read a newspaper from that city? Presumably there are many crappy newspapers in NY too.
I just don't read "normal news" newspapers, so I couldn't really care less whether they want to charge or not.. if every news site started charging I don't know what I'd do, since sites like slashdot link to several news sites a day.. though in Slashdot's case the real worth is often in the actual comments rather than the stories.
I don't have a problem on the general populace voting on what the laws are, but I do have a problem with them voting which cases are worthy of a trial. That's just sidestepping the law entirely.
Well, George Lucas was actually doing a bit of that recently over powerful blue laser devices, though admittedly more for the handle design than the actual laser..
...
Contrary to popular perception, YouTube users are not pudgy teenagers pretending to be Star Wars action heroes, at least the majority are not. Rather, over half of them (54.5%) were in the 35-64 age bracket, according to eMarketer. And 25-34 subgroup comprised 19.1% of the total, while kids aged 12-17 made up only 12.6% of the total.
Something like "a skydive, but higher!" doesn't seem much like a trade secret though. I know there are technical challenges to be overcome, but they had already been overcome in 1959 for current world record. I don't see how the guy's suggestion is any more valuable than "how about attempting a world record bus jump by adding another bus to the end of the jump?".
Depends what kind of agreement they entered into before the talks I suppose. I don't know the relevant laws for automatic/unspoken/unwritten contracts between two parties in such a scenario. It seems like it would be a very hard business to make a living in, presenting your ideas before you are paid, with no possibility of any patents on your ideas.
I refer the poster to YouTube. Pick a video. Basically any video. Now, look at the comments. Do you really want these guys deciding what lawsuits are "worthwhile"? I think they'd actually get more ridiculous. These people are the ones that sue when they accidentally kill their dog in a microwave.
So if someone tells you to jump off a bridge, you're not allowed to do do it if they suddenly decide that no actually it was their idea and they want to keep it?
but I wouldn't bet against it being possible either.
When I said "possible", I meant "possible eventually", or "theoretically possible", I didn't mean that we would be able to accurately simulate a brain's complete thought processes in a timely fashion with current tech.
That doesn't negate anything I said. It feels free to you, but how do you know you're not just doing what you would have done anyway (even by taking part in this very conversation)? What exactly is the "free"? Does it mean that if we replayed this scenario, you'd do something else, because there is some random or otherwise external factor?
But then, what decides that random or external factor? And why do you think it makes things any more free than your current existence? All that matters is that you feel as if you have free will. Because you do, essentially. Your brain definitely make its own decisions based on appropriate input. But that doesn't mean it's not pre-determinable if you ran an accurate enough simulation. Not saying it definitely is pre-determinable with the data we can acquire with our current level of tech, but I wouldn't bet against it being possible either.