I presume you mean _Hawking_
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Hawking
(Fear not you're not the first, I hear it all the time, it's one of those things where it's said incorrectly once and everyone repeats it)
The normal case is to generate a code from a particular iris pattern in a repeatable way. Think of it like a hash for your iris.
The database lookup would be interesting, but I'm sure that there are smart ways to optimise this. People have probably already started tackling these problems.
You can get a third party app called magicbutton which does what you want. By default it will close something if you push the X, but you can set up inclusions/exclusions, so that frequency used apps stay in the background.
It isn't. Haven't you seen them, all they do it wave their hands around and look silly.
That's the point. Everyone thinks it's a breeze when it isn't, so everyone underestimates everything.
There's a slightly funnier was of dealing with junk mail in this way. You do as you say, use the business reply envelopes, but utilise the fact that lots of companies send you junk. Swap forms, placing the form from one in the envelope of the other.
People like to because they cannot into but who blocks the. Did easy to?
please...
A sentence should still make sense grammatically if you take out everything in the parentheses (although it may be missing information on the context). Yours do not, so fail to make any useful point other than you don't like them.
He's not even started using nested parentheses yet...
It's FUD. The fact that they have an agreement in the first place suggests to people that Novell (read Linux) infringes on Microsoft's IP.
This means that people start to think "Linux infringes, maybe we should steer clear until it sorts itself out", as it's better to be safe.
I doubt highly that Linux infringes on any legitimate IP of Microsoft's, but Microsoft what the general public (and managers that don't know any better) to think that it does.
As was said with the SCO case (or if it wasn't then it should have been), "Show us where we infringe, and we'll happily take it out". Microsoft can peruse all of the source, so why would they choose not to simply sue anyone/everyone who makes money from Linux?
Indeed, you are correct. But in security through obscurity, you are assuming that no-one will have access to your source code/and or "secret" information. The fact is that instances such as this source being leaked show that these obscure rather than secure secrets will make it into the wild.
With large organisations it's only a matter of time before a determined person/group has access to your code.
At least with open source, you have lots of eyes on code, and you hope that at least one non-bad person spots your flaw and points it out. With closed source, anyone who has gone to the trouble of getting your source code is likely to be up to no good.
I think you're forgetting that it involves relativity, therefore doesn't need to make sense.
Plus I seem to remember that conservation of momentum was a by product of that 4-vector thing, so maybe something funny happens. Maybe.
This presumes that the Company in question has no motivation to make a profit.
While I will agree that all things being equal, the money they gain from selling personal information will lead to reduced prices, there is nothing to stop companies simply augmenting their profits with this, other than normal market competition.
And don't forget that we are not only talking about about authorised use of personal information (as agreed when starting to use a product/service), but also about T&C creep (where Terms and Conditions change over time without a process to inform the user) and Unauthorised use/loss of information.
From a quick shifty of that patent, it looks like it's based around the "If I just block the magnets, I create energy!". Just like the idea that one of the guys in my secondary school got excited about when he's invented a perpetual motion machine.
If they are so confident, and having been spending the last 3 years on this project, why haven't they built a big one that outputs a reasonable amount of power, and powered something of a reasonable size. I expect they have been "tweaking" the design, and it's "just under the 100% mark", they just need to deal with some "inefficent" parts of the system.
Or maybe they've invented unlimited free power.
Slashdot Mirror
I presume you mean _Hawking_ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Hawking (Fear not you're not the first, I hear it all the time, it's one of those things where it's said incorrectly once and everyone repeats it)
The normal case is to generate a code from a particular iris pattern in a repeatable way. Think of it like a hash for your iris.
The database lookup would be interesting, but I'm sure that there are smart ways to optimise this. People have probably already started tackling these problems.
You can get a third party app called magicbutton which does what you want. By default it will close something if you push the X, but you can set up inclusions/exclusions, so that frequency used apps stay in the background.
I suggest heading over to http://www.modaco.com/
It isn't. Haven't you seen them, all they do it wave their hands around and look silly. That's the point. Everyone thinks it's a breeze when it isn't, so everyone underestimates everything.
There's a slightly funnier was of dealing with junk mail in this way. You do as you say, use the business reply envelopes, but utilise the fact that lots of companies send you junk. Swap forms, placing the form from one in the envelope of the other.
:-)
Let them work out how it happened
A sentence should still make sense grammatically if you take out everything in the parentheses (although it may be missing information on the context). Yours do not, so fail to make any useful point other than you don't like them.
He's not even started using nested parentheses yet...
It's FUD. The fact that they have an agreement in the first place suggests to people that Novell (read Linux) infringes on Microsoft's IP.
This means that people start to think "Linux infringes, maybe we should steer clear until it sorts itself out", as it's better to be safe.
I doubt highly that Linux infringes on any legitimate IP of Microsoft's, but Microsoft what the general public (and managers that don't know any better) to think that it does.
As was said with the SCO case (or if it wasn't then it should have been), "Show us where we infringe, and we'll happily take it out". Microsoft can peruse all of the source, so why would they choose not to simply sue anyone/everyone who makes money from Linux?
While that may have come from the UK, it did not come from the BBC.
What that sentence could be trying to say is that the Air Force has the rights to the frequency, but only started using it three years ago.
Indeed that's what I think they did. Which is why he replaced his eyes when he was wanted for pre-murder.
Indeed, you are correct. But in security through obscurity, you are assuming that no-one will have access to your source code/and or "secret" information. The fact is that instances such as this source being leaked show that these obscure rather than secure secrets will make it into the wild.
With large organisations it's only a matter of time before a determined person/group has access to your code.
At least with open source, you have lots of eyes on code, and you hope that at least one non-bad person spots your flaw and points it out. With closed source, anyone who has gone to the trouble of getting your source code is likely to be up to no good.
I think you're forgetting that it involves relativity, therefore doesn't need to make sense. Plus I seem to remember that conservation of momentum was a by product of that 4-vector thing, so maybe something funny happens. Maybe.
This presumes that the Company in question has no motivation to make a profit. While I will agree that all things being equal, the money they gain from selling personal information will lead to reduced prices, there is nothing to stop companies simply augmenting their profits with this, other than normal market competition. And don't forget that we are not only talking about about authorised use of personal information (as agreed when starting to use a product/service), but also about T&C creep (where Terms and Conditions change over time without a process to inform the user) and Unauthorised use/loss of information.
From a quick shifty of that patent, it looks like it's based around the "If I just block the magnets, I create energy!". Just like the idea that one of the guys in my secondary school got excited about when he's invented a perpetual motion machine. If they are so confident, and having been spending the last 3 years on this project, why haven't they built a big one that outputs a reasonable amount of power, and powered something of a reasonable size. I expect they have been "tweaking" the design, and it's "just under the 100% mark", they just need to deal with some "inefficent" parts of the system. Or maybe they've invented unlimited free power.