Because it often includes other forms of discrete taping. Frequently the wire tap statutes will include provisions for wearing a wire, and I suspect that's what they based the decision on.
I could be wrong, but when it gets to that point, I suspect that they're required to identify themselves as law enforcement. In many, if not all, jurisdictions pulling a gun on somebody is a force able felony and as a result if they don't identify themselves as law enforcement you would have the right to pull out your own weapon and defend yourself.
What part of the world are you living in where they have cameras in the changing rooms or restrooms? People can and do go to prison for putting cameras in those types of places.
Yes, we are. And it's not even close. The conditions of our prisons are superior to the conditions of most North Koreans. To even suggest that we're comparable requires a level of ignorance sufficient to land one a commentator position on Fox news.
OTOH I might have missed the forced labor camps where the US government sends dissidents to work themselves to death.
Given the way that Apple treats 3rd party devs and the locked down phone, it would be very surprising if Apple keeps their loyalty without making a major course correction. Those dick moves like randomly rejecting applications and stealing functionality out of apps for the base system isn't really endearing them with the people they need to keep the appstore vibrant.
Indeed, this would be one step harder to deal with than those stupid javascript prompts which can't be canceled without popping up again or killing the entire browser.
Malware writers have been doing something like that for a while now. Mainly to deal with screen keyboards that some lending institutions require. I'm not sure that it's particularly prevalent at this point, but the technology is already there to exploit that.
The UN is leader of what precisely? I mean in all seriousness, the main reason that the UN lacks credibility is that it has basically no say in anything. Except in the rare case where there's agreement to do the least possible task applicable to the situation.
Not entirely, this is essentially something they've been doing for a while, it's just that the President is asking for it to be legal. Whereas President Bush was more about just doing it and accusing anybody that opposed it of sympathizing with terrorists.
I'm not sure about the iPhones, but my Nexus One camera is shockingly good. Not good enough for use as a proper camera, but it is just fine for casual photos or ones that are spur of the moment. It wasn't that long ago that a consumer P&S of any resolution couldn't do as well.
I'm guessing that the iPhone is probably worse at it, if they're seriously considering adding this technology onto it.
Doesn't work with the form factor. The iPhone would have to grow gigantic in order for this sort of thing to work. Even a P&S with a hot shoe is typically too small for this to work properly. You really need several inches for it to work, and at that point you're in a situation where you've got a flash with an iPhone attached to it.
I doubt that very much. The reason for the off camera flash is one of geometry. The closer the flash is to the lens the more likely it is that you get red eyes. Additionally, the closer the lens is to the flash the more directly the light bounces and the less control you have over the shadows.
So, unless Apple is planning to start a new trend of huge cameras, it's unlikely that this technology will really make much of a difference. As the angles and distances involved are just not enough to make much of an impact. Beyond that, the extra circuitry will add heat and probably detract somewhat from the image quality available.
That was an awesome movie, but that part was particularly silly. In this day and age, any system which uses biometrics has somewhere in it a contingency plan specifically to discourage that sort of thing. Whether it be pulse detection or checking to make sure that there's a face attached to the eye.
Certain companies don't use targeted advertising. I can guarantee you that if that ever happens, it won't be the company named in the advertisement that pays for it.
I don't think that this would work with a dead or otherwise non-functioning eyeball. If you've ever looked closely at your eye in the mirror, you'd notice that it's not static. It's constantly adjusting slightly to barely perceptible changes in light. You're not going to be able to easily replicate that with a dead eye.
I'm sure that somebody has been doing something to curtail the use of dead body parts to break into the system. I know that they've been working on the dead finger problem for quite a while as well.
There are limitations, and in this case Apple is in essence trying to claim ownership of an English word which has been in existence for hundreds of years. A VideoPod is quite simply a Pod for videos, or basically just a container for videos. Considering that the special thing for Apple is using generic terms and declaring them to be trademarked by virtue of attaching an i to the front, I don't think they have any right to pretend like they own the word "pod."
Indeed, the bigger problem is when you start to have multiple accounts across multiple institutions. Downloading from one or two banks isn't that big a deal, but doing it across more gets to be a hassle really quickly.
In the US, they typically limit the period over which you can complain about inaccuracies to about a month. After which they say too bad, you didn't report it.
That's a solid point, a slightly less bad way is having something pop up to remind you to give it the information so that it downloads it for you. It's not as bad, however you still have to be mindful of any portion of the process which isn't secure.
Slashdot Mirror
Probably the weird "re" ending. In the US, we pronounce that differently than in Europe typically.
Because it often includes other forms of discrete taping. Frequently the wire tap statutes will include provisions for wearing a wire, and I suspect that's what they based the decision on.
I could be wrong, but when it gets to that point, I suspect that they're required to identify themselves as law enforcement. In many, if not all, jurisdictions pulling a gun on somebody is a force able felony and as a result if they don't identify themselves as law enforcement you would have the right to pull out your own weapon and defend yourself.
What part of the world are you living in where they have cameras in the changing rooms or restrooms? People can and do go to prison for putting cameras in those types of places.
Yes, we are. And it's not even close. The conditions of our prisons are superior to the conditions of most North Koreans. To even suggest that we're comparable requires a level of ignorance sufficient to land one a commentator position on Fox news.
OTOH I might have missed the forced labor camps where the US government sends dissidents to work themselves to death.
Given the way that Apple treats 3rd party devs and the locked down phone, it would be very surprising if Apple keeps their loyalty without making a major course correction. Those dick moves like randomly rejecting applications and stealing functionality out of apps for the base system isn't really endearing them with the people they need to keep the appstore vibrant.
Except for the loud mouths that seem to think that the only acceptable solution to crime is more jails and longer sentences.
For the most part if you wait until you're attacked to deal with it, you've already lost and you're pretty much stuck with damage mitigation at best.
Indeed, this would be one step harder to deal with than those stupid javascript prompts which can't be canceled without popping up again or killing the entire browser.
Malware writers have been doing something like that for a while now. Mainly to deal with screen keyboards that some lending institutions require. I'm not sure that it's particularly prevalent at this point, but the technology is already there to exploit that.
The UN is leader of what precisely? I mean in all seriousness, the main reason that the UN lacks credibility is that it has basically no say in anything. Except in the rare case where there's agreement to do the least possible task applicable to the situation.
The FLOTUS?
Not entirely, this is essentially something they've been doing for a while, it's just that the President is asking for it to be legal. Whereas President Bush was more about just doing it and accusing anybody that opposed it of sympathizing with terrorists.
I'm not sure about the iPhones, but my Nexus One camera is shockingly good. Not good enough for use as a proper camera, but it is just fine for casual photos or ones that are spur of the moment. It wasn't that long ago that a consumer P&S of any resolution couldn't do as well.
I'm guessing that the iPhone is probably worse at it, if they're seriously considering adding this technology onto it.
Doesn't work with the form factor. The iPhone would have to grow gigantic in order for this sort of thing to work. Even a P&S with a hot shoe is typically too small for this to work properly. You really need several inches for it to work, and at that point you're in a situation where you've got a flash with an iPhone attached to it.
Basically Apple is patenting the ability of the camera to do that for you, but less good and with significantly less control in a consumer device.
I doubt that very much. The reason for the off camera flash is one of geometry. The closer the flash is to the lens the more likely it is that you get red eyes. Additionally, the closer the lens is to the flash the more directly the light bounces and the less control you have over the shadows.
So, unless Apple is planning to start a new trend of huge cameras, it's unlikely that this technology will really make much of a difference. As the angles and distances involved are just not enough to make much of an impact. Beyond that, the extra circuitry will add heat and probably detract somewhat from the image quality available.
That was an awesome movie, but that part was particularly silly. In this day and age, any system which uses biometrics has somewhere in it a contingency plan specifically to discourage that sort of thing. Whether it be pulse detection or checking to make sure that there's a face attached to the eye.
Certain companies don't use targeted advertising. I can guarantee you that if that ever happens, it won't be the company named in the advertisement that pays for it.
I don't think that this would work with a dead or otherwise non-functioning eyeball. If you've ever looked closely at your eye in the mirror, you'd notice that it's not static. It's constantly adjusting slightly to barely perceptible changes in light. You're not going to be able to easily replicate that with a dead eye.
I'm sure that somebody has been doing something to curtail the use of dead body parts to break into the system. I know that they've been working on the dead finger problem for quite a while as well.
There are limitations, and in this case Apple is in essence trying to claim ownership of an English word which has been in existence for hundreds of years. A VideoPod is quite simply a Pod for videos, or basically just a container for videos. Considering that the special thing for Apple is using generic terms and declaring them to be trademarked by virtue of attaching an i to the front, I don't think they have any right to pretend like they own the word "pod."
Don't forget about a certain board game.
Not really, Pod has been used in that fashion for a really long time. Or at least way longer than Apple has used the word as a part of its trademark.
Indeed, the bigger problem is when you start to have multiple accounts across multiple institutions. Downloading from one or two banks isn't that big a deal, but doing it across more gets to be a hassle really quickly.
In the US, they typically limit the period over which you can complain about inaccuracies to about a month. After which they say too bad, you didn't report it.
That's a solid point, a slightly less bad way is having something pop up to remind you to give it the information so that it downloads it for you. It's not as bad, however you still have to be mindful of any portion of the process which isn't secure.