And what is so innovative about putting wheels on it anyway?
We teleconference between here and Chicago all the time. A couple of cameras and a couple of big, wide screen monitors and a speakerphone is all you need. We've had it for at least a decade.
So making it stupid by having the TV set roll around is innovative? To paraphrase Zaphod, score one for for cool minus several million for brain dead. Have any of these people ever been in a meeting? The only thing moving around the room will be the monitor.
Who comes up with these dumb ideas anyway? Or am I missing something?
As a physician, I'm not going to be inclined to spend much time looking at a highly edited version of somebody's medical history
And considering HIPPA, you would be in deep doo doo if you posted anyone's info (you know that, of course, but others here may not)
What I would like for MY doctor to do would be to give me a CD of my medical records when I visit him. I'm 56, most of my medical records simply no longer exist. Like everyone else, doctors retire and records get lost.
But I don't want it on Google. I want it in my hand so if my doctor retires, dies, or his office is destroyed by a fire or flood or tornado I can still have the records to present to a new guy.
People with unhealthy lifestyles cost communities and bigger units (states, federal govt) a lot of money in emergency services, medicare costs, etc.
Yeah? Give me (actually, give my friends who have no health care) taxpayer-supported medical care like the civilized world has and we'll talk. Now, when you said "emergency services" I thought smokers, and wondered about how various fires start. Google helped little. But one page (listed at the bottom of Google's first search page) suggests that we put a high tax on candles, children, geezers, and furnaces, the last of which outstrips smoking during winter months as the leading cause of fires.
I fail to see how trans-fats and sugar have anything to do with emergency services in the US. You're going to go to the hospital in an ambulance and die (unless you don't make it to the ambulance). Fat smokers just do it faster than fit nonsmokers.
I know that personal experience is discounted here at slashdot, but my teetotalling nonsmoking grandmother and her son (my uncle) illustrate the illogical nonrationality of saying smokers (and fat people) cost taxpayers money.
Grandma was born in 1903, a few months before the Wright Brothers flew their winged, powered bicycle. She neither smoked nor drank. From age 65 to age 99 she collected Social Security and went to the doctor at least monthly, paid for by Medicare.
Uncle Bill, her son, had lost a lung to tuberculosis, worked in a garbage incinerator in St Louis, drank heavily, and smoked four packs of Kools every day through his one lung. He died at age 64 without ever seeing a doctor on the Medicare dime, or collecting a penny in Social Security.
Uncle Bill didn't cost the taxpayer anything. Grandma did.
Everybody gets sick and dies. Smokers just do it earlier, and by doing so SAVE the taxpayer lots of money.
Logically, smokers should get a discount on their taxes.
What you say is quite true, but we're talking about police photography here, not art. Color photography wasn't even all that common (although not THAT uncommon) even when I was a kid.
If the shades are correct and the painter is skilled then a black and white photo of a color painting will be identical to a black and white photo of its model.
Rather than praising the genius if a single painter (Google did that, not me, I prefer post-impressionism), my point was that a skilled painter doesn't need photoshop, and his training will teach himeverything he needs to know to fool the FBI.
I must not have been very clear yesterday, I've had a nasty chest cold with a fever all week. But it seems folks are reading stuff into the ocmment that I didn't say.
I didn't say old programmers were the best. My point was to the original commentor (and those like him), who made the assumption that being over 30 somehow makes you ignorant about all things tech.
Yes, there are a lot of tech-illiterate geezers. There are tech-illiterate youths. And nerds of all ages. But not all are, and to lump people together like that is stupid. THAT was the point of the comment. If someone had made a sweeping generalization like that about young people I would have been equally vocal. After all, my daughters are young people.
Hard for a layman to tell a photo of a Velázquez from a photo of its model. Like everything else, today's artists just have better tools. A good painter could have fooled the FBI in 1920, only easier than with a computer-generated image today.
The cameras weren't as good then, so it would have been harder to tell a photo of a model from a photo of a painting of the model. The cameras were not in color. Nobody expected a photo of a painting to be anything but a photo.
Lets see any of you lay persons who haven't been trained in art make a photoshop image as good as a Velázquez painting.
So what they do is they make praise songs about some politicians and other celebrities who pay them for the song.
Hmmm... I recall hearing rock and roll music that used to be in the top 40 as background music for car commercials. Seems one politician had a Fleetwood Mac song as their theme one year, another had a John Meloncafuckit Icantspellit COUGAR song as his.
I swear that one Van Halen song sounds like a jingle for soda pop (and I've always liked most of their stuff)
I better check the map to make sure I'm not in SOUTH America...
Whoever modded that post "offtopic" better hope I don't see it when I metamoderate. It's not only on topic, it makes a salient point - the RIAA labels are no longer necessary. The bands don't need them, and the listeners don't need them.
I have no idea what the parent poster's band's music sounds like (yet) but the RIAA has a monopoly on radio. They used to have a monopoly on recording and distribution, but these days we have inexpensive studios and duplications where you can cut an album for far less than the band's instruments and other equipment, and the internet for dissimination.
politicsapocalypse, you shouldn't be so subtle here. Most slashdotters are pretty sharp, but unfortunately not all are. Some days I'm not so sharp myself.
You don't put your music on a website to attract visitors so you can earn that puny ad revinue. You put your music on a web site to sell CDs.
I'm not going to buy your CD unless I like the music on it. I can't like music I've never heard. The MP# is the advertising for the CD. Yes, many (maybe even most) will download the MP3 and not buy the CD, but you've lost nothing. Many, maybe most, didn't like the music. They're not going to buy your CD whether they download the MP3 or hear it on the radio.
If the RIAA really had a problem with free music they'd not let it be played on the radio.
Seems you're doing more to help piracy than hurt it
Their aim isn't to stop downloading of RIAA music; why would they? It's free advertising. If they had a problem with that then they wouldn't let their music be played on the radio. KSHE in St Louis plays seven whole albums, uncut and uninterrupted, every Sunday night and has been doing so for decades. I had Ted Nugent's Cat Scratch Fever on cassette a week before its release, recorded in full from KSHE. That was thirty years ago! You can sample from a radio even more easily than recording a cassette.
The RIAA's problem is that their competitors, the indie bands, are on baidu. Take all the indies off baidu and the RIAA will have no problem with it.
Nobody takes issue with free advertising unless a) it's their competetitor's free advertising or b) they're incredibly stupid.
I was fooling around trying to be funny with the "link to prince on Google" thing and discovered that if you substitute led zeppelin (or presumably any other RIAA band) you get lots of MP3s from Google.
However, some friends of mine, "The Station", an indie jam band with two CDs out and live shows posted at archive.org for several years (lots of shows posted) and the obligatory MySpace page, AND their own URL, returns "do you mean The Situation?" with a list of RIAA songs with "station" in the name.
The RIAA should sue Google. Or considering that the indies are competing with the RIAA maybe the RIAA paid Google to do this?
Now where did I put that tinfoil, I need to make a hat...
Slashdot Mirror
The same as web 2.0, which is the same as web 1.0 was. It's yuppie buzztalk for the clueless by people who miss the dotcom bubble.
Web 1.0 was "It's a series of tubes."
Web 2.0 is "It's a cloud."
Web 3.0 will be "It's pixie dust and fairie magic".
Maybe I should have RTFA, I thought it was about faked evidence.
And what is so innovative about putting wheels on it anyway?
We teleconference between here and Chicago all the time. A couple of cameras and a couple of big, wide screen monitors and a speakerphone is all you need. We've had it for at least a decade.
So making it stupid by having the TV set roll around is innovative? To paraphrase Zaphod, score one for for cool minus several million for brain dead. Have any of these people ever been in a meeting? The only thing moving around the room will be the monitor.
Who comes up with these dumb ideas anyway? Or am I missing something?
I had a vaccuum cleaner once that slightly resembled R2D2.
As a physician, I'm not going to be inclined to spend much time looking at a highly edited version of somebody's medical history
And considering HIPPA, you would be in deep doo doo if you posted anyone's info (you know that, of course, but others here may not)
What I would like for MY doctor to do would be to give me a CD of my medical records when I visit him. I'm 56, most of my medical records simply no longer exist. Like everyone else, doctors retire and records get lost.
But I don't want it on Google. I want it in my hand so if my doctor retires, dies, or his office is destroyed by a fire or flood or tornado I can still have the records to present to a new guy.
People with unhealthy lifestyles cost communities and bigger units (states, federal govt) a lot of money in emergency services, medicare costs, etc.
Yeah? Give me (actually, give my friends who have no health care) taxpayer-supported medical care like the civilized world has and we'll talk. Now, when you said "emergency services" I thought smokers, and wondered about how various fires start. Google helped little. But one page (listed at the bottom of Google's first search page) suggests that we put a high tax on candles, children, geezers, and furnaces, the last of which outstrips smoking during winter months as the leading cause of fires.
I fail to see how trans-fats and sugar have anything to do with emergency services in the US. You're going to go to the hospital in an ambulance and die (unless you don't make it to the ambulance). Fat smokers just do it faster than fit nonsmokers.
I know that personal experience is discounted here at slashdot, but my teetotalling nonsmoking grandmother and her son (my uncle) illustrate the illogical nonrationality of saying smokers (and fat people) cost taxpayers money.
Grandma was born in 1903, a few months before the Wright Brothers flew their winged, powered bicycle. She neither smoked nor drank. From age 65 to age 99 she collected Social Security and went to the doctor at least monthly, paid for by Medicare.
Uncle Bill, her son, had lost a lung to tuberculosis, worked in a garbage incinerator in St Louis, drank heavily, and smoked four packs of Kools every day through his one lung. He died at age 64 without ever seeing a doctor on the Medicare dime, or collecting a penny in Social Security.
Uncle Bill didn't cost the taxpayer anything. Grandma did.
Everybody gets sick and dies. Smokers just do it earlier, and by doing so SAVE the taxpayer lots of money.
Logically, smokers should get a discount on their taxes.
So was web 2.0.
What you say is quite true, but we're talking about police photography here, not art. Color photography wasn't even all that common (although not THAT uncommon) even when I was a kid.
Considering that the site's about peoples' insides, shouldn't that be "offal"?
None of the photos in the linked wikipedia article show any hint of brush strokes.
If the shades are correct and the painter is skilled then a black and white photo of a color painting will be identical to a black and white photo of its model.
Rather than praising the genius if a single painter (Google did that, not me, I prefer post-impressionism), my point was that a skilled painter doesn't need photoshop, and his training will teach himeverything he needs to know to fool the FBI.
We didn't all get stuck in the tar or burned alive by the asteroid. Some of us grew wings and feathers.
I may have more years than most slashdotters but I'm far younger than most of them.
If I could have cured my detached retina by diet and exersize I'd have been crazy to undergo the vitrectomy.
Blues and jazz were more deadly than rock and roll!
If I had a dollar for every brain I didn't have, I'd have over six billion dollars. Of course, that's just human brains, do animals count?
(NKB checked)
If brains were dynamite, most people here in Springfield wouldn't have enough to blow their noses.
I must not have been very clear yesterday, I've had a nasty chest cold with a fever all week. But it seems folks are reading stuff into the ocmment that I didn't say.
I didn't say old programmers were the best. My point was to the original commentor (and those like him), who made the assumption that being over 30 somehow makes you ignorant about all things tech.
Yes, there are a lot of tech-illiterate geezers. There are tech-illiterate youths. And nerds of all ages. But not all are, and to lump people together like that is stupid. THAT was the point of the comment. If someone had made a sweeping generalization like that about young people I would have been equally vocal. After all, my daughters are young people.
George Bush Doesn't Like Black People (this was a very popular song shortly after Hurricane Katrina).
Fittingly, their art is an homage to Diego Velázquez.
Hard for a layman to tell a photo of a Velázquez from a photo of its model. Like everything else, today's artists just have better tools. A good painter could have fooled the FBI in 1920, only easier than with a computer-generated image today.
The cameras weren't as good then, so it would have been harder to tell a photo of a model from a photo of a painting of the model. The cameras were not in color. Nobody expected a photo of a painting to be anything but a photo.
Lets see any of you lay persons who haven't been trained in art make a photoshop image as good as a Velázquez painting.
So what they do is they make praise songs about some politicians and other celebrities who pay them for the song.
Hmmm... I recall hearing rock and roll music that used to be in the top 40 as background music for car commercials. Seems one politician had a Fleetwood Mac song as their theme one year, another had a John Meloncafuckit Icantspellit COUGAR song as his.
I swear that one Van Halen song sounds like a jingle for soda pop (and I've always liked most of their stuff)
I better check the map to make sure I'm not in SOUTH America...
There's a typo in your post, here's the fixed version:
This is seeing a dinasaur stuck in the tar pit, and telling it to adapt.
Let the dinasaur die. In fact, put a spear in it to put it out of its misery before its thrashing causes more damage.
Whoever modded that post "offtopic" better hope I don't see it when I metamoderate. It's not only on topic, it makes a salient point - the RIAA labels are no longer necessary. The bands don't need them, and the listeners don't need them.
I have no idea what the parent poster's band's music sounds like (yet) but the RIAA has a monopoly on radio. They used to have a monopoly on recording and distribution, but these days we have inexpensive studios and duplications where you can cut an album for far less than the band's instruments and other equipment, and the internet for dissimination.
politicsapocalypse, you shouldn't be so subtle here. Most slashdotters are pretty sharp, but unfortunately not all are. Some days I'm not so sharp myself.
You don't put your music on a website to attract visitors so you can earn that puny ad revinue. You put your music on a web site to sell CDs.
I'm not going to buy your CD unless I like the music on it. I can't like music I've never heard. The MP# is the advertising for the CD. Yes, many (maybe even most) will download the MP3 and not buy the CD, but you've lost nothing. Many, maybe most, didn't like the music. They're not going to buy your CD whether they download the MP3 or hear it on the radio.
If the RIAA really had a problem with free music they'd not let it be played on the radio.
Seems you're doing more to help piracy than hurt it
Their aim isn't to stop downloading of RIAA music; why would they? It's free advertising. If they had a problem with that then they wouldn't let their music be played on the radio. KSHE in St Louis plays seven whole albums, uncut and uninterrupted, every Sunday night and has been doing so for decades. I had Ted Nugent's Cat Scratch Fever on cassette a week before its release, recorded in full from KSHE. That was thirty years ago! You can sample from a radio even more easily than recording a cassette.
The RIAA's problem is that their competitors, the indie bands, are on baidu. Take all the indies off baidu and the RIAA will have no problem with it.
Nobody takes issue with free advertising unless a) it's their competetitor's free advertising or b) they're incredibly stupid.
Ewe muss bee knew hear.
I was fooling around trying to be funny with the "link to prince on Google" thing and discovered that if you substitute led zeppelin (or presumably any other RIAA band) you get lots of MP3s from Google.
However, some friends of mine, "The Station", an indie jam band with two CDs out and live shows posted at archive.org for several years (lots of shows posted) and the obligatory MySpace page, AND their own URL, returns "do you mean The Situation?" with a list of RIAA songs with "station" in the name.
The RIAA should sue Google. Or considering that the indies are competing with the RIAA maybe the RIAA paid Google to do this?
Now where did I put that tinfoil, I need to make a hat...