Your eye does reflect light, but not exactly like a CCD camera. (which is what i stated in my earlier post) from TFA - "A camera's image sensor -- called a CCD -- is retroreflective, which means it sends light back directly to its origin rather than scattering it."
And also from TFA - "The biggest problem is making sure we don't get false positives from, say, a large shiny earring," said Summet. "We need to make our system work well enough so that it can find a dot, then test to see if it's reflective, then see if it's retroreflective, and then test to see if it's the right shape."
So unless you have some really strange and unique eyballs, you don't need to worry.
Unless you eye reflects light like a camera CCD, you don't have to worry. The system targets a specific type of camera - not just shooting light randomly everywhere...
No essential "emergency services" use cell based communication for this reason - it is too easy to disrupt a cell signal. Why do you think cops, firemen, and ambulances still use radios??
Some cities, including Minneapolis where I live, have ruled the photo ticket boxes unconstitutional - they assume your guilt without proving it. I thought once a few cities did it in the US, the rest would follow suit. However, you can buy products like this - http://www.radarbusters.com/products/photo-radar/S uper-Protector.asp license plate cover designed to make your license unreadable to the cameras. They even have an invisible spray - http://www.radarbusters.com/products/photo-radar/P hoto-Fog.asp you can use if the license plate covers are illegal in your location.
"So by my advanced calculations, if a person makes more then $12 an hour--and a majority of Americans do--it becomes economical for them to BUY the music."
By my non-advanced calculations, people are at work less hours of the day than they are not. If you know how to use a proper search engine for torrents - http://torrents.to/ -, it should take you far less time than tracking the same song down on a legitimate site (obscure songs nonwithstanding). Most people I know, even the busy ones who make a good salary, seem to have more time than money anyways...
I think the Anonymous Coward is falling prey to the "If I agree with a statement it can't possibly be wrong" mentality. I admit that occasionally I do download a song I haven't purchased, but I don't use any bullshit to "trick" myself into justification. I know it may not be legal, but still choose to do it. Be honest with yourselves people - downloading songs you didn't pay for doesn't make you a hero or a martyr for any great cause... On the other hand, I don't believe it automatically makes you a thief either. The world we live in is mostly grey - but most people seem to like to pretend it is mostly black and white...
P. S. Max way to go on the smackdown! Dumbass knew his points were stupid/invalid or else wouldn't have posted as AC
"I will grant you he managed to change the momentum from pirating music to legal music purchases"
When did this happen exactly???? As far as I can tell, most people still download their music the old fashioned way - illegal and free (as in beer, and also as in "no DRM")
I believe that Jobs made some great advances in the digital delivery system, but I don't think he single handedly killed illegal music downloads....
You folks are all nuts..Tornados hit a few houses out of thousands in the area, and generally seem to prefer trailer parks. I have been personally through 2 tornados that have hit houses on my block and left mine untouched. Tornadoes do squat for damage in comparison to earthquakes and hurricanes which affect virtually all houses in an area.. All you need to survive a tornado is a basement...
It is not viri, or (which is worse) virii. True, the word comes directly from Latin, but not all Latin words ending in -us have -i as their plural. Besides, viri is the Latin word for 'men' (plural of vir, man, the root the English virile). There is in fact no written attestation of a Latin plural of virus.
If you would like to pursue the subject further, see the excellent article "What's the Plural of 'Virus'?". If you have some knowledge of linguistics and Latin, you might be interested in the morphological analysis of the word from the Perseus Project. http://dictionary.reference.com/help/faq/language/ v/virus.html
I see there are a few replies from ACs here, which probably are pointing out the same thing, but I don't read AC comments...
You think companies want the bad PR and financial loses?? Just slapping some fine on the breach isn't going to be enough deterrent to make everything secure overnight. It is more a question of education and pointing out the fact it is cheaper to be secure and not have an incident. Most companies want to do the right thing, but just aren't sure exactly how... Data security is not an "off the shelf" product - it is education, policy making, and following procedures.
Unsafe habbits and stupid human errors are the cause for most identity thefts, not the particular OS the computer is running. And social engineering not using any computer at all is still one of the most effective tools for identity theft. Windows is not responsible for identity theft, and using Linux or OS X or (fill in OS here) will not give you absolute protection. Let me ask you this - would you rather use a credit card on a properly protected Windows box, or a misconfigured Linux box??
Users will only do the stupid thing that they are allowed to do by the administrators. Don't give them anything but lowly user access and let them try to install their stupid screensavers. I work at a university, and anytime Joe User wants to install anything they need to call me for assistance. Annoying sometimes? Sure, but less annoying than having to spend 2 hours wiping and re-installing because they did something utterly moronic... You can lock down Windows machines to a pretty tight set of rules, (contrary to popular belief on Slashdot) but most compaines just don't choose to do so.
Can't find a link to the search engine problem, but have read a few artilces confirming what parent said about not being able to search multiple word phrases...
There are laws that do already. But fines for infractions after the fact don't do anything to prevent things from happeneing... But now laws have passed that make the individuals responsible (and can be fined) and not just the companies....
Slashdot Mirror
Your eye does reflect light, but not exactly like a CCD camera. (which is what i stated in my earlier post) from TFA - "A camera's image sensor -- called a CCD -- is retroreflective, which means it sends light back directly to its origin rather than scattering it."
And also from TFA - "The biggest problem is making sure we don't get false positives from, say, a large shiny earring," said Summet. "We need to make our system work well enough so that it can find a dot, then test to see if it's reflective, then see if it's retroreflective, and then test to see if it's the right shape."
So unless you have some really strange and unique eyballs, you don't need to worry.
Unless you eye reflects light like a camera CCD, you don't have to worry. The system targets a specific type of camera - not just shooting light randomly everywhere...
No essential "emergency services" use cell based communication for this reason - it is too easy to disrupt a cell signal. Why do you think cops, firemen, and ambulances still use radios??
Some cities, including Minneapolis where I live, have ruled the photo ticket boxes unconstitutional - they assume your guilt without proving it. I thought once a few cities did it in the US, the rest would follow suit. However, you can buy products like this - http://www.radarbusters.com/products/photo-radar/S uper-Protector.asp license plate cover designed to make your license unreadable to the cameras. They even have an invisible spray - http://www.radarbusters.com/products/photo-radar/P hoto-Fog.asp you can use if the license plate covers are illegal in your location.
"So by my advanced calculations, if a person makes more then $12 an hour--and a majority of Americans do--it becomes economical for them to BUY the music."
By my non-advanced calculations, people are at work less hours of the day than they are not. If you know how to use a proper search engine for torrents - http://torrents.to/ -, it should take you far less time than tracking the same song down on a legitimate site (obscure songs nonwithstanding). Most people I know, even the busy ones who make a good salary, seem to have more time than money anyways...
I think the Anonymous Coward is falling prey to the "If I agree with a statement it can't possibly be wrong" mentality. I admit that occasionally I do download a song I haven't purchased, but I don't use any bullshit to "trick" myself into justification. I know it may not be legal, but still choose to do it. Be honest with yourselves people - downloading songs you didn't pay for doesn't make you a hero or a martyr for any great cause... On the other hand, I don't believe it automatically makes you a thief either. The world we live in is mostly grey - but most people seem to like to pretend it is mostly black and white...
P. S. Max way to go on the smackdown! Dumbass knew his points were stupid/invalid or else wouldn't have posted as AC
"I will grant you he managed to change the momentum from pirating music to legal music purchases"
When did this happen exactly???? As far as I can tell, most people still download their music the old fashioned way - illegal and free (as in beer, and also as in "no DRM")
I believe that Jobs made some great advances in the digital delivery system, but I don't think he single handedly killed illegal music downloads....
You folks are all nuts..Tornados hit a few houses out of thousands in the area, and generally seem to prefer trailer parks. I have been personally through 2 tornados that have hit houses on my block and left mine untouched. Tornadoes do squat for damage in comparison to earthquakes and hurricanes which affect virtually all houses in an area.. All you need to survive a tornado is a basement...
But can they run Linux??
Oh, wait, um....
Except I read on Slashdot that BSD is dead.... Oh and something about Natalie Protman + hot grits...
But does it run Linux?
Q. What is the plural of virus?
/ v/virus.html
A. Viruses.
It is not viri, or (which is worse) virii. True, the word comes directly from Latin, but not all Latin words ending in -us have -i as their plural. Besides, viri is the Latin word for 'men' (plural of vir, man, the root the English virile). There is in fact no written attestation of a Latin plural of virus. If you would like to pursue the subject further, see the excellent article "What's the Plural of 'Virus'?". If you have some knowledge of linguistics and Latin, you might be interested in the morphological analysis of the word from the Perseus Project.
http://dictionary.reference.com/help/faq/language
I see there are a few replies from ACs here, which probably are pointing out the same thing, but I don't read AC comments...
"How many of you practising safe sex make sure no fluids whatever are swapped?"
This is Slashdot, where safe sex means you have a firewall between you and the porn site...
"How many bad viruses would it take to get rid of this trend?"
Not even an infinite amount of the worst viruses could stamp out basic human stupidity. Like death and taxes, it is just inevitable...
Something Slashdotters commonly pretend doesn't exist... But hey, ignorance is bliss, right?
"Why Vista Release Really Slipped"
To give a million Slashdotters more time to enjoy posting why it will suck...
You think companies want the bad PR and financial loses?? Just slapping some fine on the breach isn't going to be enough deterrent to make everything secure overnight. It is more a question of education and pointing out the fact it is cheaper to be secure and not have an incident. Most companies want to do the right thing, but just aren't sure exactly how... Data security is not an "off the shelf" product - it is education, policy making, and following procedures.
Unsafe habbits and stupid human errors are the cause for most identity thefts, not the particular OS the computer is running. And social engineering not using any computer at all is still one of the most effective tools for identity theft. Windows is not responsible for identity theft, and using Linux or OS X or (fill in OS here) will not give you absolute protection. Let me ask you this - would you rather use a credit card on a properly protected Windows box, or a misconfigured Linux box??
Users will only do the stupid thing that they are allowed to do by the administrators. Don't give them anything but lowly user access and let them try to install their stupid screensavers. I work at a university, and anytime Joe User wants to install anything they need to call me for assistance. Annoying sometimes? Sure, but less annoying than having to spend 2 hours wiping and re-installing because they did something utterly moronic... You can lock down Windows machines to a pretty tight set of rules, (contrary to popular belief on Slashdot) but most compaines just don't choose to do so.
http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/03/21/042 9236
FBI agents not having email
Can't find a link to the search engine problem, but have read a few artilces confirming what parent said about not being able to search multiple word phrases...
There are laws that do already. But fines for infractions after the fact don't do anything to prevent things from happeneing... But now laws have passed that make the individuals responsible (and can be fined) and not just the companies....
Windows can be locked down to do only those things, or even more restrictive. It just sounds like the administration wasn't doing this....
Yeah, facts can be used to prove anything!
"Gamers are pretty serious about taking care of their stuff. Try to sell them a device that's been defaced and you just might hear some angry words."
That is, until the gamer finds out he can buy it for half the retail price...
"Black is currently a Europe-exclusive color."
Heh, not anymore.....