Actually, those notices are there to "educate" the public -- so that when the MPAA sues and you say "Hey, I didn't know it was illegal!", they can respond with "That's why we put that notice saying it's illegal in there."
First, I assume that your relative has, and uses, a valid disabled placard. Further, I will assume that the person who didn't want their picture taken did not display a placard or a disabled license plate.
My technique in the case of your relative would be to assume (perhaps hope or pretend would be more accurate) that the placard was issued to them and that they had a valid need. I wouldn't say anything, but would instead continue on my way. (Unfortunately, around here -- San Francisco -- it is apparently more likely the opposite, but what can you do, eh?)
On the other hand, if I see someone getting out of a vehicle without a placard (or license plate) displayed, I generally remind them, gently, "don't forget to display your disabled placard." At that point, I can't do anything other than give them the benefit of the doubt and assume they simply forgot to display it. It's easy to do -- I've done it.
If they respond that they don't have one or that "I'm only going to be a moment", then they're fair game. I try to calmly explain why that's not acceptable, but it doesn't always work. When diplomacy and education fail, then I have no problem sitting down behind them, blocking them in, until a police officer can be summoned.
Now, I have, in the past, been in a situation where I was perfectly healthy, but still used a placard to be able to park at a meter all day downtown. (Note, this was not a disabled parking space, just a meter.) At the time, I was driving my parents (it was my dad's placard) to their office and then continuing on to mine. At first, I parked way the heck away and took the bus to my office, but after the first time my dad had to go home in the middle of the day and it took me over an hour to get the car and pick him up, I started parking closer. It was, in my opinion, a valid use of the placard.
Had I ever been questioned by a police officer, I would have said quite simply that he should give me a ticket and let me fight it in front of a judge than to let me go because he believed my story. I would rather take the time to fight the ticket than have cops running around believing everyone's story.
My German sucks (I can ask you if you want to go to the movies, poorly) but the SnapTFT might help.
I'll also add that I can't believe all the idiots out there who go "Oooh! Why don't you just use [ssh|vnc|other solution that simply wouldn't work based on what was asked]. Doesn't anybody read the thing before posting "Linux! Windoze sucks!"?
What these folks are looking for is basically a portable dumb terminal that uses VGA and PS/2 instead of serial or ethernet connections. While I don't necessarily need such a beastie myself, it doesn't mean that what I use (9" monitor, regular keyboard) will work for these folks. I also use an ethernet-based dumb terminal that requires an external VGA and KB, but it wouldn't help to suggest that since that's basically the problem.
Anyway, enough ranting by an old fart. Still, I think there might be a market for a modern dumb terminal -- all those rack mount KB/Monitor units are expensive... wouldn't a single, portable model be more cost effective? If I were designing it, I would make it have a single, quick-connect connector for Mon/KB/Ms and then sell adapters for $25 or something. That way, you walk up to the machine you want to access and snap! you're connected. If you're cheap, you just carry the single, included connector with you and connect the three cables to it.
Is not an entierly bad idea, but its not being done properly.
This much, I'll agree with. The number one barrier to successful computer use in the classroom (and they can be incredibly powerful tools) is training. Teachers need to learn how to use them to enhance the learning experience. (My wife's master's thesis was on using computers to assist in teaching reading and she found this to be the case in her research.)
First off, not every kid should have an internet connection.
The resources, tools, and materials available on the internet are so vast and valuable that internet access should indeed be available in every classroom. Period. Teachers should be taught what is out there, how to use it, and how to make sure that access in not used improperly.
Its simply not safe for kids to have un-guided access... subjet to constant teacher review. Perhaps a single lab, with all monitors in view of the proctor would be considered adequate.
Perhaps you would consider it adequate, but I'll bet your knowledge of education is limited to having experienced it (in limited amounts, apparently) as a student. Ask someone who knows something about teaching.
Youve got underpaid, unmotivated and uneducated teachers, attempting to simply control a group of apathetic and uncaring students, who have little to no motivation and guidance from their gaurdians.
And here I have to offer an unmitigated "Bullshit!" How many teachers do you know? How often do you volunteer in a classroom? Get out there and try it yourself, then come back. The majority of teachers work their tails off, spend their own money, and put up with nonsense that would make most slashdot readers cower in fear, just to enhance the lives and learning of their students. I'll agree with the underpaid bit, though.
The students are *not* uncaring, especially in the early years. I will grant you that a lot of parents seem to see the school system as a free babysitting service and don't help with (or even hinder) their children's education. Parents are a huge part of the problem.
A nation of unmotivated morons cannot compete with.. well.. india.... a major part of the problem is that people are too incompetant to do the job.
I'll certainly give you that. btw, it's incompetent. Also, in your third paragraph, the contraction of it is is it's; its is the possesive. Also, I think you mean subject, but that could just be a typo. In paragraph 4, America's should be capitalized and you've left out the apostrophe in You've at the start of the second sentence. There are other mistakes, but you get the point...
Now that almost all American public schools have their intarweb installed
Dunno where you live, but it sure must be nice there....where the women are strong, the men are good looking, and all the children are above average.
Unfortunately, over here in the real world, not all schools are wired, or even have adequate computers and support. My wife has eight computers in her classroom, of which, only one was provided by the school. The rest we paid for ourselves. They're all older macs, although I think most now are at least 68040-based. Why aren't they all iMacs? Because teachers aren't paid much and what little they are paid goes right back to school in the form of school supplies.
So no, not all schools are all hooked up. At least, not over here outside your little gated community. My wife's school, btw, does have internet access -- via dial-up in the library.
You might talk to the folks at NextBus who offer that sort of info for San Francisco's Municipal Railway. (You can check my stop if you want.) They are probably too expensive for your situation (I suspect they're out to make money) but they might at least have some advice for you.
It's not that parents want to get out of doing our work, it's that we don't want to do more work than we signed up for.
I became an employee after 12 years as a consultant literally days before my son was born. A big part of the reason I did so was so that I could work *only* 40 hours per week. Unfortunately, Management's desire to get six month projects done in a month hasn't helped that.
It doesn't help, either, when the kids *do* work 80+ hours a week, grumbling about how the parents don't. No one should have to work more than they agreed to or are paid for. For the last two years, I have consistently worked more than 40 hours each week, usually around 42-45. Often, I've worked a lot more. Last week, I put in 67.5 hours -- and my wife is 9 months pregnant.
I don't mind working a little overtime now and then, or even a lot once in a while, but continually working 60+ hours is not what I signed up for. If you, as a young kid, are stupid enough to skip your parties and movies and so on, simply because management is too cheap to hire enough people or incompetent at scheduling, that's your problem. Just don't get pissed at those smart enough to stick to the bargain they made.
allowing the EOS-1D Mark II to be used in legal proceedings
Back about 10 years ago, when injet-based fax machines became common, it occurred to me that one could scan someone's signature, paste it to the end of a document (perhaps one that says they give you all their money) and print it on an inkjet printer. At that point, you could say that it was a copy of the original made on a inkjet-based fax machine. There would be no difference.
Except that one would have to lie under oath to have it accepted in court.
The problem is, however, that most members of the legal community (seeing as how they're members of the legal community and not the slashdot community (MarkWelch excepted, of course)) would not know that the document could be forged like that, and will not know that this "verification" will probably very quickly be circumvented (resulting in a story on slashdot, no doubt.)
Some technologically savvy crook will walk into court and say "here is a picture I took proving [X] using the DVK-E2 to ensure that it has not been tampered with" and the judge and jury will go "ooh, ahh" and believe it. Period.
I refer you to the scene in My Cousin Vinny wherein a witness talks about the gas chromatograph (or whatever it was) that he used to analyze the rubber from the defendants' tires. The prosecutor then asked if it was turbo charged, which got a laugh from the jury. Oooh, fancy machine, must be good. Never mind that because the tires were a common make, model, and size, then yes, they would be chemically the same.
This is simply more of that -- some techno wonder that someone will be able to point to and therefore justify buying that particular camera.
In your particular situation, certainly, it makes sense that you would need to rely on standard batteries... You can never know when you would be stuck for days in some outlying village and suddenly have a rash of insurance claims arise there...
On the other hand, I don't think I am an idiot, and yet I not only have two digicams that use proprietary batteries, but I am also drooling over a third.
The first was a Sony Mavica -- it used the same batteries as my brother-in-law's camcorder, interestingly -- and I had no problem charging the battery before I new I would need it. If my wife was going to take it to school, we'd charge it overnight and she'd be able to use it all day. No need to carry extra batteries if she didn't want to. We actually did end up getting a couple extra batteries; they were aftermarket ones and very reasonable.
Now I carry a Nikon 5700 which uses the EN-EL1 battery, a proprietary Nikon battery. Except that I bought two more (aftermarket, high-capacity) batteries on ebay for about $25 including shipping. When one gets low, I swap it out and put it in the charger. It can use a standard disposable camera battery (2CR5 I think) so I did carry those before getting the spares, but they're kinda pricey so the extra rechargables quickly made sense. Mind you, I've taken over 4000 pictures in a year and a half or so, so I probably use the camera much more than most people use theirs -- others may not need a second battery, especially if they do not use it daily in their work.
If your camera *only* takes proprietary *disposable* batteries, that can get expensive, and you may want to factor that in. However, even that would not necessarily make you an idiot for purchasing it -- there may be other factors which outweigh that negative.
If I were to say anyone was an idiot, I would point to you for continually wasting money on disposable batteries when your cameras are such an on-going, integral part of your business. But, you may need the tax deductions or something. I won't even mention the environmental concerns.
Nikon also uses CF cards -- such as my 5700 (and the soon-to-be-mine 8700). However, while I agree that CF is the best choice, I think most people would be equally happy with any of the other choices. I'm talking about the people who would have in the past bought a $100 camera at Target or Sears. They will probably reuse the same card over and over again, just deleting images to make room for the new ones.
Personally, I have 4 256MB cards at the moment, and rotate through them. When one is full, I unload it to the computer I put together specifically for images and put it back on my belt to be reused. I never delete images (no matter how bad) and I always use the camera's RAW mode to get the highest quality.
In a year and a half, I've taken over 4000 pictures with this camera and have everyone archived on CD, backup hard drive, and on the main hard drive in RAW format, high-res JPEG, VGA res, and am working on resizing all the older images to "thumbnail" (128x96) and "web" (320x240) as well.
My wife, on the other hand, has one of those $100 cameras. She goes through maybe 4 or 5 rolls a year, and only because she takes pics of her kids at school. Otherwise she'd take a lot less. She uses our older Sony Mavica at school, which uses floppy disks and takes 640x480 images. Works great for her.
Most people are more like my wife than me. For them, they'll get one memory card, not really care about the cost, and never buy another until they buy another camera. A lot may not even know there is a card in the camera or how to remove it -- they'll just hook up the cable between the camera and pc and upload the pictures that way.
As long as your company isn't too big, get a big whiteboard, some new dry erase markers, and play pictionary. For an All Play, draw a line down the center and each team gets half.
Another good one is Catch Phrase. Sort of a combination of verbal charades (get your opponent to say "spaghetti" and then get rid of the device asap.) There is an electronic version and manual; either is fine.
In today's Fry's ad, I spotted another netcam called the Veo Xirlink. It's $180 with a $25 rebate -- net of $155. It's also available at the same price from Outpost.
The specs look pretty good:
Built-in Webserver
Pan/Tilt (120 degree Pan, 80degree Tilt)
Built-in Mic
1 lux low light sensitivity (I'm told that means it's good in dark rooms)
I'm pretty sure I can talk the wife into approving the purchase of at least one this weekend for our needs.
They could only measure 0-60 because at 4 seconds, the li-ion batteries are all dead.
Take a look at this article in EV World. Note the picture at the top. See that little yellow trailer behind the TZero?
I met Alan Cocconi once, back in 1995. There was a big EV rally in Yosemite valley because they were introducing electric buses to tote the tourists around. There were a lot of EV folks and a bunch of the big names in EV's were set up to show off their work, including AC propulsion. Alan had just arrived (a little late, iirc) in his electric Honda CRX, having come from Washington DC.
How did he make it from WashDC to Yosemite Valley, California? He had a little trailer attached to the back with a well-tuned little engine. It burned gas to produce electricity -- much as the hybrids apparently do today. If he was travelling across the country, he used the trailer. If he was going to the grocery store, he left it at home. It would appear he has the same setup for the TZero.
There are some common misconceptions about EV's and people's usage of cars. Most people think that a car needs a range of hundreds of miles. Not true, most of the time. Daily commutes are usually under 80 miles total, and if you "fill up" each night, a range of 80-100 miles is plenty. Of course, if filling up meant going out in the rain to put gas in your car, that would be a royal pain. But with an EV, it means plugging an extension cord in in your garage. Piece o' cake.
The next kneejerk exclamation is "what about when I want to go farther, like to Disneyland?" Well, you can use a set up like Alan's trailer, or to quote an EV owner from a number of years ago, "The best range extender for an electric vehicle is a rental car." Another option, and popular with EV folk, is to have a second, gasoline-powered vehicle for longer trips.
So, while amusing, your comment is not really based in reality, now is it?
Okay, so maybe you're rich and can afford to simply laze about while your child is pampered by the servants...
For those of us in the real world, naptime can be an opportunity to get some work done. As can early mornings or late nights when the kid's asleep. Unfortunately, at least in my case, I can't hear the kid downstairs when working in my attic office. So I have a standard audio monitor. When I hear the kid waking up, I zip downstairs. (Two and a half flights of stairs takes only a few seconds.) I would love to supplement the audio with video over the network.
So, I don't have the luxury of being able to sit next to my kid 24/7. Perhaps my work during naptime will get me there someday though. Until then, I too am looking for a camera.
As for my wife, she works too, and certainly doesn't want me hanging out in her classroom all day. Her home office is three stairs from mine, so if we're both working at home, sitting with the servers is near enough, yet out of her hair. Again, I would love to have your life where the three of you spend every hour of every day together, walking white sand beaches hand-in-hand... but I live in the real world. Sucks to be me.
Actually, my wife knows that the most caring thing I can do right now is work to pay the mortgage and put food on the table. Sitting on my tuckus all day wouldn't help the kid or the wife, either in the long or short term.
Somebody needs to attend the Vintage Computer Festival! The TRS-80 Model I, II, III, 4, et al used the Z-80, not the 6502. Unless you mean the Color Computer, which (iirc) used the 6809. There was another one (Model 6000?) that used the 68000, iirc. But no 6502's.
By the same token, many decry things like Amazon.com selling their address just because "they have it".
The difference there is that one provides one's address to Amazon as part of a transaction between oneself and Amazon. Many people may expect that this information is shared in confidence.
The fare info that is being scraped, however, is being published to the general public. The publisher has, however, attempted to put limitations on how that info can be accessed or used -- much like, I imagine, the various open source licenses say you can use OS code, but you have to provide your source code openly. (IANAL, and I'm probably not saying that right, but hopefully you get the idea.)
Personally, I think the issue is whether one has the right to limit what can be done with info (or other assets) that one makes available to the public. I don't see why not; one is always free to not access it if one does not like the terms.
It's not the MP3 format itself that is the issue, it is illegal copies of copyrighted material that is in question. You are the copyright owner of the recordings you make. If I made a copy of them, in whatever format, without your permission, I would be committing a crime.
The RIAA, et al, are only interested in the stuff for which they hold the copyright. So, if they spot an MP3 file on your hard drive, they'll compare it to see if it is the same (or, presumably, illegally close to being the same) as something for which they own the copyright.
If they find a match, the question becomes one of legality. If we stipulate that it is legal to make an MP3 copy of an album you own, then they would require proof that you own a legal copy. My concern is that the simple answer (for the RIAA) is do as one poster says is now the case in the UK -- make *all* MP3 (or other) copies illegal.
The problem is similar to many other that we have (unfortunately) come to accept as the norm. Why do you have a lock on your door? Because there is a small group of persons that would rob you if you didn't. Those few make the rest of us have to deal with the inconvenience of fumbling with our keys, etc. When I was a kid, I use to leave my bike on the front lawn when I went in for lunch. If I did that today, I wouldn't even get as far as the kitchen before it was stolen. A few jerks make me have to haul my bike up the stairs into the house, even just to take a leak.
A few jerks who illegally copy music may make it so that I can't have MP3 copies of my CD's.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, those notices are there to "educate" the public -- so that when the MPAA sues and you say "Hey, I didn't know it was illegal!", they can respond with "That's why we put that notice saying it's illegal in there."
First, I assume that your relative has, and uses, a valid disabled placard. Further, I will assume that the person who didn't want their picture taken did not display a placard or a disabled license plate.
My technique in the case of your relative would be to assume (perhaps hope or pretend would be more accurate) that the placard was issued to them and that they had a valid need. I wouldn't say anything, but would instead continue on my way. (Unfortunately, around here -- San Francisco -- it is apparently more likely the opposite, but what can you do, eh?)
On the other hand, if I see someone getting out of a vehicle without a placard (or license plate) displayed, I generally remind them, gently, "don't forget to display your disabled placard." At that point, I can't do anything other than give them the benefit of the doubt and assume they simply forgot to display it. It's easy to do -- I've done it.
If they respond that they don't have one or that "I'm only going to be a moment", then they're fair game. I try to calmly explain why that's not acceptable, but it doesn't always work. When diplomacy and education fail, then I have no problem sitting down behind them, blocking them in, until a police officer can be summoned.
Now, I have, in the past, been in a situation where I was perfectly healthy, but still used a placard to be able to park at a meter all day downtown. (Note, this was not a disabled parking space, just a meter.) At the time, I was driving my parents (it was my dad's placard) to their office and then continuing on to mine. At first, I parked way the heck away and took the bus to my office, but after the first time my dad had to go home in the middle of the day and it took me over an hour to get the car and pick him up, I started parking closer. It was, in my opinion, a valid use of the placard.
Had I ever been questioned by a police officer, I would have said quite simply that he should give me a ticket and let me fight it in front of a judge than to let me go because he believed my story. I would rather take the time to fight the ticket than have cops running around believing everyone's story.
My German sucks (I can ask you if you want to go to the movies, poorly) but the SnapTFT might help.
I'll also add that I can't believe all the idiots out there who go "Oooh! Why don't you just use [ssh|vnc|other solution that simply wouldn't work based on what was asked]. Doesn't anybody read the thing before posting "Linux! Windoze sucks!"?
What these folks are looking for is basically a portable dumb terminal that uses VGA and PS/2 instead of serial or ethernet connections. While I don't necessarily need such a beastie myself, it doesn't mean that what I use (9" monitor, regular keyboard) will work for these folks. I also use an ethernet-based dumb terminal that requires an external VGA and KB, but it wouldn't help to suggest that since that's basically the problem.
Anyway, enough ranting by an old fart. Still, I think there might be a market for a modern dumb terminal -- all those rack mount KB/Monitor units are expensive... wouldn't a single, portable model be more cost effective? If I were designing it, I would make it have a single, quick-connect connector for Mon/KB/Ms and then sell adapters for $25 or something. That way, you walk up to the machine you want to access and snap! you're connected. If you're cheap, you just carry the single, included connector with you and connect the three cables to it.
This much, I'll agree with. The number one barrier to successful computer use in the classroom (and they can be incredibly powerful tools) is training. Teachers need to learn how to use them to enhance the learning experience. (My wife's master's thesis was on using computers to assist in teaching reading and she found this to be the case in her research.)
The resources, tools, and materials available on the internet are so vast and valuable that internet access should indeed be available in every classroom. Period. Teachers should be taught what is out there, how to use it, and how to make sure that access in not used improperly.
Perhaps you would consider it adequate, but I'll bet your knowledge of education is limited to having experienced it (in limited amounts, apparently) as a student. Ask someone who knows something about teaching.
And here I have to offer an unmitigated "Bullshit!" How many teachers do you know? How often do you volunteer in a classroom? Get out there and try it yourself, then come back. The majority of teachers work their tails off, spend their own money, and put up with nonsense that would make most slashdot readers cower in fear, just to enhance the lives and learning of their students. I'll agree with the underpaid bit, though.
The students are *not* uncaring, especially in the early years. I will grant you that a lot of parents seem to see the school system as a free babysitting service and don't help with (or even hinder) their children's education. Parents are a huge part of the problem.
I'll certainly give you that. btw, it's incompetent. Also, in your third paragraph, the contraction of it is is it's; its is the possesive. Also, I think you mean subject, but that could just be a typo. In paragraph 4, America's should be capitalized and you've left out the apostrophe in You've at the start of the second sentence. There are other mistakes, but you get the point...
Dunno where you live, but it sure must be nice there. ...where the women are strong, the men are good looking, and all the children are above average.
Unfortunately, over here in the real world, not all schools are wired, or even have adequate computers and support. My wife has eight computers in her classroom, of which, only one was provided by the school. The rest we paid for ourselves. They're all older macs, although I think most now are at least 68040-based. Why aren't they all iMacs? Because teachers aren't paid much and what little they are paid goes right back to school in the form of school supplies.
So no, not all schools are all hooked up. At least, not over here outside your little gated community. My wife's school, btw, does have internet access -- via dial-up in the library.
Try the National Venture Capital Association or the Western Association of Venture Capitalists. Both make their membership directories available.
You might talk to the folks at NextBus who offer that sort of info for San Francisco's Municipal Railway. (You can check my stop if you want.) They are probably too expensive for your situation (I suspect they're out to make money) but they might at least have some advice for you.
It's not that parents want to get out of doing our work, it's that we don't want to do more work than we signed up for.
I became an employee after 12 years as a consultant literally days before my son was born. A big part of the reason I did so was so that I could work *only* 40 hours per week. Unfortunately, Management's desire to get six month projects done in a month hasn't helped that.
It doesn't help, either, when the kids *do* work 80+ hours a week, grumbling about how the parents don't. No one should have to work more than they agreed to or are paid for. For the last two years, I have consistently worked more than 40 hours each week, usually around 42-45. Often, I've worked a lot more. Last week, I put in 67.5 hours -- and my wife is 9 months pregnant.
I don't mind working a little overtime now and then, or even a lot once in a while, but continually working 60+ hours is not what I signed up for. If you, as a young kid, are stupid enough to skip your parties and movies and so on, simply because management is too cheap to hire enough people or incompetent at scheduling, that's your problem. Just don't get pissed at those smart enough to stick to the bargain they made.
The review says:
Back about 10 years ago, when injet-based fax machines became common, it occurred to me that one could scan someone's signature, paste it to the end of a document (perhaps one that says they give you all their money) and print it on an inkjet printer. At that point, you could say that it was a copy of the original made on a inkjet-based fax machine. There would be no difference.
Except that one would have to lie under oath to have it accepted in court.
The problem is, however, that most members of the legal community (seeing as how they're members of the legal community and not the slashdot community (MarkWelch excepted, of course)) would not know that the document could be forged like that, and will not know that this "verification" will probably very quickly be circumvented (resulting in a story on slashdot, no doubt.)
Some technologically savvy crook will walk into court and say "here is a picture I took proving [X] using the DVK-E2 to ensure that it has not been tampered with" and the judge and jury will go "ooh, ahh" and believe it. Period.I refer you to the scene in My Cousin Vinny wherein a witness talks about the gas chromatograph (or whatever it was) that he used to analyze the rubber from the defendants' tires. The prosecutor then asked if it was turbo charged, which got a laugh from the jury. Oooh, fancy machine, must be good. Never mind that because the tires were a common make, model, and size, then yes, they would be chemically the same.
This is simply more of that -- some techno wonder that someone will be able to point to and therefore justify buying that particular camera.
In your particular situation, certainly, it makes sense that you would need to rely on standard batteries... You can never know when you would be stuck for days in some outlying village and suddenly have a rash of insurance claims arise there...
On the other hand, I don't think I am an idiot, and yet I not only have two digicams that use proprietary batteries, but I am also drooling over a third.
The first was a Sony Mavica -- it used the same batteries as my brother-in-law's camcorder, interestingly -- and I had no problem charging the battery before I new I would need it. If my wife was going to take it to school, we'd charge it overnight and she'd be able to use it all day. No need to carry extra batteries if she didn't want to. We actually did end up getting a couple extra batteries; they were aftermarket ones and very reasonable.
Now I carry a Nikon 5700 which uses the EN-EL1 battery, a proprietary Nikon battery. Except that I bought two more (aftermarket, high-capacity) batteries on ebay for about $25 including shipping. When one gets low, I swap it out and put it in the charger. It can use a standard disposable camera battery (2CR5 I think) so I did carry those before getting the spares, but they're kinda pricey so the extra rechargables quickly made sense. Mind you, I've taken over 4000 pictures in a year and a half or so, so I probably use the camera much more than most people use theirs -- others may not need a second battery, especially if they do not use it daily in their work.
If your camera *only* takes proprietary *disposable* batteries, that can get expensive, and you may want to factor that in. However, even that would not necessarily make you an idiot for purchasing it -- there may be other factors which outweigh that negative.
If I were to say anyone was an idiot, I would point to you for continually wasting money on disposable batteries when your cameras are such an on-going, integral part of your business. But, you may need the tax deductions or something. I won't even mention the environmental concerns.
Nikon also uses CF cards -- such as my 5700 (and the soon-to-be-mine 8700). However, while I agree that CF is the best choice, I think most people would be equally happy with any of the other choices. I'm talking about the people who would have in the past bought a $100 camera at Target or Sears. They will probably reuse the same card over and over again, just deleting images to make room for the new ones.
Personally, I have 4 256MB cards at the moment, and rotate through them. When one is full, I unload it to the computer I put together specifically for images and put it back on my belt to be reused. I never delete images (no matter how bad) and I always use the camera's RAW mode to get the highest quality.
In a year and a half, I've taken over 4000 pictures with this camera and have everyone archived on CD, backup hard drive, and on the main hard drive in RAW format, high-res JPEG, VGA res, and am working on resizing all the older images to "thumbnail" (128x96) and "web" (320x240) as well.
My wife, on the other hand, has one of those $100 cameras. She goes through maybe 4 or 5 rolls a year, and only because she takes pics of her kids at school. Otherwise she'd take a lot less. She uses our older Sony Mavica at school, which uses floppy disks and takes 640x480 images. Works great for her.
Most people are more like my wife than me. For them, they'll get one memory card, not really care about the cost, and never buy another until they buy another camera. A lot may not even know there is a card in the camera or how to remove it -- they'll just hook up the cable between the camera and pc and upload the pictures that way.
As long as your company isn't too big, get a big whiteboard, some new dry erase markers, and play pictionary. For an All Play, draw a line down the center and each team gets half.
Another good one is Catch Phrase. Sort of a combination of verbal charades (get your opponent to say "spaghetti" and then get rid of the device asap.) There is an electronic version and manual; either is fine.
This problem is the impetus behind ComputerHistory.net, a sort of internet archive for computer history web sites.
I'll second that recommendation. Not the best website design, but the service is good and the price is right.
In today's Fry's ad, I spotted another netcam called the Veo Xirlink. It's $180 with a $25 rebate -- net of $155. It's also available at the same price from Outpost.
The specs look pretty good:
I'm pretty sure I can talk the wife into approving the purchase of at least one this weekend for our needs.
Take a look at this article in EV World. Note the picture at the top. See that little yellow trailer behind the TZero?
I met Alan Cocconi once, back in 1995. There was a big EV rally in Yosemite valley because they were introducing electric buses to tote the tourists around. There were a lot of EV folks and a bunch of the big names in EV's were set up to show off their work, including AC propulsion. Alan had just arrived (a little late, iirc) in his electric Honda CRX, having come from Washington DC.
How did he make it from WashDC to Yosemite Valley, California? He had a little trailer attached to the back with a well-tuned little engine. It burned gas to produce electricity -- much as the hybrids apparently do today. If he was travelling across the country, he used the trailer. If he was going to the grocery store, he left it at home. It would appear he has the same setup for the TZero.
There are some common misconceptions about EV's and people's usage of cars. Most people think that a car needs a range of hundreds of miles. Not true, most of the time. Daily commutes are usually under 80 miles total, and if you "fill up" each night, a range of 80-100 miles is plenty. Of course, if filling up meant going out in the rain to put gas in your car, that would be a royal pain. But with an EV, it means plugging an extension cord in in your garage. Piece o' cake.
The next kneejerk exclamation is "what about when I want to go farther, like to Disneyland?" Well, you can use a set up like Alan's trailer, or to quote an EV owner from a number of years ago, "The best range extender for an electric vehicle is a rental car." Another option, and popular with EV folk, is to have a second, gasoline-powered vehicle for longer trips.
So, while amusing, your comment is not really based in reality, now is it?
There are a lot of options at this store, and here's another store with a bunch of choices.
Here's a mfr link and a write-up at Tom's Hardware. Here's a website detailing one person's experiences with it.
The Panasonic kx-hcm10 offers pan/tilt... I think they have a newer model also. Not wireless, but you might not really need that.
Okay, so maybe you're rich and can afford to simply laze about while your child is pampered by the servants...
For those of us in the real world, naptime can be an opportunity to get some work done. As can early mornings or late nights when the kid's asleep. Unfortunately, at least in my case, I can't hear the kid downstairs when working in my attic office. So I have a standard audio monitor. When I hear the kid waking up, I zip downstairs. (Two and a half flights of stairs takes only a few seconds.) I would love to supplement the audio with video over the network.
So, I don't have the luxury of being able to sit next to my kid 24/7. Perhaps my work during naptime will get me there someday though. Until then, I too am looking for a camera.
As for my wife, she works too, and certainly doesn't want me hanging out in her classroom all day. Her home office is three stairs from mine, so if we're both working at home, sitting with the servers is near enough, yet out of her hair. Again, I would love to have your life where the three of you spend every hour of every day together, walking white sand beaches hand-in-hand... but I live in the real world. Sucks to be me.
Actually, my wife knows that the most caring thing I can do right now is work to pay the mortgage and put food on the table. Sitting on my tuckus all day wouldn't help the kid or the wife, either in the long or short term.
Somebody needs to attend the Vintage Computer Festival! The TRS-80 Model I, II, III, 4, et al used the Z-80, not the 6502. Unless you mean the Color Computer, which (iirc) used the 6809. There was another one (Model 6000?) that used the 68000, iirc. But no 6502's.
Hopefully, they've removed them all by now... (Anyone need parking tickets fixed in Michigan?)
For that matter, have all the banks operating in Michigan removed their security?
Dang, if only I didn't have this conscience thing!
The difference there is that one provides one's address to Amazon as part of a transaction between oneself and Amazon. Many people may expect that this information is shared in confidence.
The fare info that is being scraped, however, is being published to the general public. The publisher has, however, attempted to put limitations on how that info can be accessed or used -- much like, I imagine, the various open source licenses say you can use OS code, but you have to provide your source code openly. (IANAL, and I'm probably not saying that right, but hopefully you get the idea.)
Personally, I think the issue is whether one has the right to limit what can be done with info (or other assets) that one makes available to the public. I don't see why not; one is always free to not access it if one does not like the terms.
It's not the MP3 format itself that is the issue, it is illegal copies of copyrighted material that is in question. You are the copyright owner of the recordings you make. If I made a copy of them, in whatever format, without your permission, I would be committing a crime.
The RIAA, et al, are only interested in the stuff for which they hold the copyright. So, if they spot an MP3 file on your hard drive, they'll compare it to see if it is the same (or, presumably, illegally close to being the same) as something for which they own the copyright.
If they find a match, the question becomes one of legality. If we stipulate that it is legal to make an MP3 copy of an album you own, then they would require proof that you own a legal copy. My concern is that the simple answer (for the RIAA) is do as one poster says is now the case in the UK -- make *all* MP3 (or other) copies illegal.
The problem is similar to many other that we have (unfortunately) come to accept as the norm. Why do you have a lock on your door? Because there is a small group of persons that would rob you if you didn't. Those few make the rest of us have to deal with the inconvenience of fumbling with our keys, etc. When I was a kid, I use to leave my bike on the front lawn when I went in for lunch. If I did that today, I wouldn't even get as far as the kitchen before it was stolen. A few jerks make me have to haul my bike up the stairs into the house, even just to take a leak.
A few jerks who illegally copy music may make it so that I can't have MP3 copies of my CD's.