Maybe these locks aren't all that, but it's the Secret Service agents capping you in the head that you really have to worry about.
Exactly. The location of the white house is just thrown in there to make the whole story more menacing and cause people to overlook the fact that there isn't anything novel about utilizing a photograph of a key to make a copy.
The only real interesting thing here is that the plastic in a credit card is sufficient to rotate the cylinder (which isn't that all surprising). Either way, I'd imagine that anyone with access to the lock and a photograph of the key probably could go home, machine a key from brass and return at their leisure. Heck, I'd bet that you could cut a key from two layers of a soda can and still get it to work. I suppose though, there always is the threat of a guy in a tour group taking a picture of someone opening a door, carving their credit card while being shown the Lincoln bedroom, and slipping away from the group unnoticed to return to the door to find that he has opened... the broom closet.
I don't think that is a good metric. Power to run a computer is cheap if the result is sufficiently useful, and a working AI would be worth a whole lot of power.
It would be a good metric to understand how much room you have to improve, but until we have multiple AIs to compare against one another, it is a fairly limited metric.
Except I'm in engineering and so is my wife. My name has Hebrew roots and the translation is actually pretty cool sounding and if you google it, it resolves to something called the "My last name" effect (assigned to an effect in quantum physics). My wife, on the otherhand, has been asked (seriously),
"Is your name... Klingon?"
So, oddly enough, it works pretty well in our high-tech fields. I'm really tempted to start some sort of custom-car company with our names combined.:)
In this case, you either prohibit something, or you allow it. Unfortunately, we have gotten into the habit of writing laws and interpreting them so that if it isn't explicitly forbidden, then it is allowed.
I don't care if they can't do it now. I'd rather they just can't do it because they aren't allowed to.
So if you don't want to be tracked, you should stay at home and shut yourself off from the activities that you used to perform daily, legally, and with no watchful eyes.
Why is it that you are OK with this? Why is it that being tracked is ok, as long as it is only to lookup those that may have a lapsed registration/insurance/warrant. When governments tack on additional requirements to driving, will you be ok with that as well?
Where do I think I am?
In general I'm on the road or at military bases and/or ranges. I use my work phone for work, and my iphone for myself. It's worked pretty well for me so far.
Yet even though I try to stick to specific hotels, I never know if they will have wireless that is worth anything, and very often it wouldn't support a VPN with any stability. So I rely on my phones capability to tether to my laptops to do the things I would like to do. I use my iPhone a lot, and I use my computer a lot. The combined use of both generally amounts to approximately 1-2 gigs per month when I am on the road. (I use a lot more, but that's what my home networks are for).
Attempting to use a hotel's wireless connection is quite often more frustrating than just going down to the local bar and seeing if I can spot anyone I know to hang out with. The sad thing is, I generally get better service from Dunkin Donuts than I do from the local hotel. (businessmen with infected computers downloading porn/acting as zombies maybe?)
I can think of two words. Second Amendment.
However, every time I bring that up I am faced with several arguments in opposition.
1. Archaic
2. lol rifle vs rockets
3. You must be a redneck
No one said it would be easy or fun. But the fear of rockets/missiles is actually quite minor. It is a fear of the idiots who will complain that everything is too hard from behind their keyboard, bitch about this situation, and then not even go so far as to email their representatives.
(For the record, I've made friends with my representatives. It isn't that hard. Do a few fundraisers, write calmly and intelligently, and help them understand that with your assistance, they have a better chance to stay elected.)
Or you could be pulled over, mace sprayed in through your window, pulled out of your vehicle, beaten, and have the police drive off. Unfortunately there weren't many cameras back in '68.
Don't date the Chief's daughter.
Here is a copy and past to my response regarding broadband as a right. It doesn't match this topic exactly, but I'm certain that anyone who attempts to understand my position, will understand it.
Mankind may have made 99% of the most imporant discoveries without broadband, but without communication 0% would have occurred or mattered.
I believe that access to the primary methods of communication in any age is a fundamental right. From gestures and grunts, we moved to a spoken language. Then from a spoken language we invented cuneiform script. The alphabets followed and were followed by signaling techniques, then electromagnetic transmissions. Those EM signals are being improved through compression allowing even more data to be passed. At one time, letters were good enough for anyone, telephones were a luxury. Then, data service was a luxury for only the largest of companies and banks.
As you can see, the future technology is always the luxury, but the prevalent form of communication IS a necessity and access to it is a bona fide civil right.
The question shouldn't be if broadband should be a right or not, but rather, is broadband internet access now the predominant form of communication? Once that answer is 'yes' then the idea that it is a right should be automatic.
If it is not the 'standard' yet, it will be very very shortly.
I don't know about that, but I am rebuilding my MP3 collection of CDs that I already purchased. Sometimes it is easier for me to download an MP3 that someone has already ripped than it is for me to do the ripping myself. In that case, I do own the CD. I'm certain there is some sort of infringement going on because the laws are wonky, but I'm not downloading any files that I couldn't already legally make.
(I actually lost two CDs of the same album once. I liked the band enough to rebuy it from their website twice, but I'm not buying a third copy because the Susquehanna river overlapped my house for a few days and took my CDs with it).
I'll tell you what. If a movie producer gives me their planned list for the director and the actors and a copy of the screenplay, I'll turn that around in 1 day and tell you if your film will suck or not.
Now, after a few years of me depriving Uwe Boll, SNL spinoff actor, and a few Wayans brothers of their livelyhood, eventually I'll reach a point where I won't immediately recognize the crap. At that point, I may be out of a job, but the films will be better.
So there isn't some 'hit-movie' button, but there certainly should be a lever to flush the crap.
Things don't magically appear on 'the big screen' they have to be conceived and recorded first. Would you demand that a work must remain in its original format from the moment it was written until the sun runs out of hydrogen?
Sometimes there were stories that didn't originate as screenplays. Simply because they weren't originally intended for screenplays doesn't mean that it is somehow wrong to try and adapt the story.
As far as I know, most of the 'namebrand' stores will not carry any games that have not been rated. I can tell you for certain that I have not come across any major game release that has not been rated. I believe this whole issue is due to the fact that as with all games that provide the capability to modify the content via patches or have online components "Game experience may vary online" which is a common disclaimer.
This is not a problem, and although I do not play games as much as I used to, I do review them as a side venture. The 'outrage', that parents have no way of knowing what sort of games they are buying, is fabricated nonsense. There are NO games on the market that you will come across which intentionally try to mislead parents as to their content, and as I noted, most are already rated. The game industry has taken the same path as the Motion Picture Industry and established voluntary content labeling. ESRB. And, just like films, this rating is actually voluntary. And, like films, if it isn't rated some venues won't sell your product.
I simply don't see why something like this is needed. The labeling is there, and 5 minutes of research will tell a parent the true nature of the game. If that isn't enough, ask a store clerk. 9 times out of ten they will know the content of the games they sell. Even if it didn't have a rating, a title like 'Painkiller', 'Hitman', 'Max Payne', and of course 'Grand Theft Auto: Vice City', should be more than enough to raise a parent's guard.
Until we have someone selling 'Roller Coaster Tycoon: UnRated & UnCut', I doubt any of the parental grumblings are anything more than moral outrage at what our neighbor's children are watching.
It is onerous to me. I enjoy making small quick games and releasing them into the wild. I'm not too keen on having a regulatory body evaluate my next version of 'dodge the dot' or whatever it is called.
If a parent is worried that my 'Dodge the Dot' game is simply a cover for a bloodorgy of violence, then they can take heart in the fact that my game is not rated and simply, not buy it.
Please put a label on it so I can decide if it is appropriate for an 8 year old.
Then don't buy games without labels for 8 year olds. You have that option NOW.
However, if I were to develop some software and decide to sell it, do I now have to send it to the rating board for review? How much will it cost me? How long will it take?
Could you tell me if Microsoft Flight Simulator counts as a game, or software? What about Edu-tainment software? Must that be rated? I enjoy playing with Photoshop, it is a form of entertainment for me. Should that be rated?
What about games that only require an internet browser to play? Are those going to be rated?
But again, I want to know why I should submit my software to a review board before I am allowed to offer it to the public.
How are the games rated? By forcing the publishers to utilize a rating system or face their works being barred from sale in that state then you are limiting their right to publish works without being subjected to government 'approval'.
Not only that, but if what he stated was true, then the US congress could coerce the state governments into passing laws that were in violation of the Constitution of the United States.
I actually didn't mind the raspy voice when I thought about it a bit.
Here you have a billion dollar playboy trying to summon up the most gruff voice he could, and not really being able to pull it off. Remember that this is 'young' Batman as well. Typically any voice actor you see that does the 'villain' voice has more than half a century under his belt.
IE: Tony Jay
So as Bruce Wayne ages, so will the Batman voice.
It was either have a tough guy try to play a billionaire playboy, or have someone who looks like a billionaire playboy try to act like Batman. And the more 'authentic' version IS having the young guy try to sound 'tough'.
Re:Can Oscar's be given posthumously?
on
Batman Discussion
·
· Score: 1
but you know it won't end well for anyone other than him.
And since he is fairly nihilistic as well, we don't even know that for sure.
that was what I was thinking in the back of my mind. At my company, we are facing a bit of a crunch right now. We had a hiring lull for a period of 10-15 years. The result is that we have a bunch of 20 somethings, and 50+ somethings. It is great for someone like me since the opportunity to advance is much easier. Unfortunately, it is very difficult cramming in all of the knowledge from my coworker before he leaves. And lets just say that cramming about the 'lessons learned' from the Apollo missions is definately a firehose treatment. And since he has first hand engineering knowledge from it, that doesn't place him in even the 50-something age range.
The point is, with space, you really do run the risk of starting from zero if you don't keep it going and keep the information flowing from one generation to the next.
I agree with you completely. If you don't like the manner in which these laws are written, or the constitution allows (or doesn't allow) them, then you have to change the law/constitution. What is popular or preferred as the outcome to the case doesn't matter.
I was deeply turned off by the NY Times editorial on the Heller case. They basically tried to claim that the Supreme Court is going to be to blame for every homicide in the future, and a sort of 'how dare they not consider how evil firearms are'. The thing was definately the rantings of a very opinionated editor with little understanding of what purpose the Supreme Court serves.
Slashdot Mirror
Maybe these locks aren't all that, but it's the Secret Service agents capping you in the head that you really have to worry about. Exactly. The location of the white house is just thrown in there to make the whole story more menacing and cause people to overlook the fact that there isn't anything novel about utilizing a photograph of a key to make a copy. The only real interesting thing here is that the plastic in a credit card is sufficient to rotate the cylinder (which isn't that all surprising). Either way, I'd imagine that anyone with access to the lock and a photograph of the key probably could go home, machine a key from brass and return at their leisure. Heck, I'd bet that you could cut a key from two layers of a soda can and still get it to work. I suppose though, there always is the threat of a guy in a tour group taking a picture of someone opening a door, carving their credit card while being shown the Lincoln bedroom, and slipping away from the group unnoticed to return to the door to find that he has opened... the broom closet.
I don't think that is a good metric. Power to run a computer is cheap if the result is sufficiently useful, and a working AI would be worth a whole lot of power. It would be a good metric to understand how much room you have to improve, but until we have multiple AIs to compare against one another, it is a fairly limited metric.
Except I'm in engineering and so is my wife. My name has Hebrew roots and the translation is actually pretty cool sounding and if you google it, it resolves to something called the "My last name" effect (assigned to an effect in quantum physics). My wife, on the otherhand, has been asked (seriously),
:)
"Is your name... Klingon?"
So, oddly enough, it works pretty well in our high-tech fields. I'm really tempted to start some sort of custom-car company with our names combined.
In this case, you either prohibit something, or you allow it. Unfortunately, we have gotten into the habit of writing laws and interpreting them so that if it isn't explicitly forbidden, then it is allowed. I don't care if they can't do it now. I'd rather they just can't do it because they aren't allowed to.
AC: I don't see how Falungong or dalailama has anything to do with Olympics. Come on people, watch the sports! Stop bullshitting about politics.
If you don't see the connection between the Olympics and politics, then I'd be surprised if you had ever paid attention to the Olympics at all.
So if you don't want to be tracked, you should stay at home and shut yourself off from the activities that you used to perform daily, legally, and with no watchful eyes. Why is it that you are OK with this? Why is it that being tracked is ok, as long as it is only to lookup those that may have a lapsed registration/insurance/warrant. When governments tack on additional requirements to driving, will you be ok with that as well?
Where do I think I am? In general I'm on the road or at military bases and/or ranges. I use my work phone for work, and my iphone for myself. It's worked pretty well for me so far. Yet even though I try to stick to specific hotels, I never know if they will have wireless that is worth anything, and very often it wouldn't support a VPN with any stability. So I rely on my phones capability to tether to my laptops to do the things I would like to do. I use my iPhone a lot, and I use my computer a lot. The combined use of both generally amounts to approximately 1-2 gigs per month when I am on the road. (I use a lot more, but that's what my home networks are for). Attempting to use a hotel's wireless connection is quite often more frustrating than just going down to the local bar and seeing if I can spot anyone I know to hang out with. The sad thing is, I generally get better service from Dunkin Donuts than I do from the local hotel. (businessmen with infected computers downloading porn /acting as zombies maybe?)
I can think of two words. Second Amendment. However, every time I bring that up I am faced with several arguments in opposition. 1. Archaic 2. lol rifle vs rockets 3. You must be a redneck No one said it would be easy or fun. But the fear of rockets/missiles is actually quite minor. It is a fear of the idiots who will complain that everything is too hard from behind their keyboard, bitch about this situation, and then not even go so far as to email their representatives. (For the record, I've made friends with my representatives. It isn't that hard. Do a few fundraisers, write calmly and intelligently, and help them understand that with your assistance, they have a better chance to stay elected.)
Or you could be pulled over, mace sprayed in through your window, pulled out of your vehicle, beaten, and have the police drive off. Unfortunately there weren't many cameras back in '68. Don't date the Chief's daughter.
Here is a copy and past to my response regarding broadband as a right. It doesn't match this topic exactly, but I'm certain that anyone who attempts to understand my position, will understand it. Mankind may have made 99% of the most imporant discoveries without broadband, but without communication 0% would have occurred or mattered. I believe that access to the primary methods of communication in any age is a fundamental right. From gestures and grunts, we moved to a spoken language. Then from a spoken language we invented cuneiform script. The alphabets followed and were followed by signaling techniques, then electromagnetic transmissions. Those EM signals are being improved through compression allowing even more data to be passed. At one time, letters were good enough for anyone, telephones were a luxury. Then, data service was a luxury for only the largest of companies and banks. As you can see, the future technology is always the luxury, but the prevalent form of communication IS a necessity and access to it is a bona fide civil right. The question shouldn't be if broadband should be a right or not, but rather, is broadband internet access now the predominant form of communication? Once that answer is 'yes' then the idea that it is a right should be automatic. If it is not the 'standard' yet, it will be very very shortly.
and spend the rest on the troops. Or, just not spend it. Radical idea, I know.
I don't know about that, but I am rebuilding my MP3 collection of CDs that I already purchased. Sometimes it is easier for me to download an MP3 that someone has already ripped than it is for me to do the ripping myself. In that case, I do own the CD. I'm certain there is some sort of infringement going on because the laws are wonky, but I'm not downloading any files that I couldn't already legally make. (I actually lost two CDs of the same album once. I liked the band enough to rebuy it from their website twice, but I'm not buying a third copy because the Susquehanna river overlapped my house for a few days and took my CDs with it).
I'll tell you what. If a movie producer gives me their planned list for the director and the actors and a copy of the screenplay, I'll turn that around in 1 day and tell you if your film will suck or not.
Now, after a few years of me depriving Uwe Boll, SNL spinoff actor, and a few Wayans brothers of their livelyhood, eventually I'll reach a point where I won't immediately recognize the crap. At that point, I may be out of a job, but the films will be better.
So there isn't some 'hit-movie' button, but there certainly should be a lever to flush the crap.
Things don't magically appear on 'the big screen' they have to be conceived and recorded first. Would you demand that a work must remain in its original format from the moment it was written until the sun runs out of hydrogen?
Sometimes there were stories that didn't originate as screenplays. Simply because they weren't originally intended for screenplays doesn't mean that it is somehow wrong to try and adapt the story.
As far as I know, most of the 'namebrand' stores will not carry any games that have not been rated. I can tell you for certain that I have not come across any major game release that has not been rated. I believe this whole issue is due to the fact that as with all games that provide the capability to modify the content via patches or have online components "Game experience may vary online" which is a common disclaimer.
This is not a problem, and although I do not play games as much as I used to, I do review them as a side venture. The 'outrage', that parents have no way of knowing what sort of games they are buying, is fabricated nonsense. There are NO games on the market that you will come across which intentionally try to mislead parents as to their content, and as I noted, most are already rated. The game industry has taken the same path as the Motion Picture Industry and established voluntary content labeling. ESRB. And, just like films, this rating is actually voluntary. And, like films, if it isn't rated some venues won't sell your product.
I simply don't see why something like this is needed. The labeling is there, and 5 minutes of research will tell a parent the true nature of the game. If that isn't enough, ask a store clerk. 9 times out of ten they will know the content of the games they sell. Even if it didn't have a rating, a title like 'Painkiller', 'Hitman', 'Max Payne', and of course 'Grand Theft Auto: Vice City', should be more than enough to raise a parent's guard.
Until we have someone selling 'Roller Coaster Tycoon: UnRated & UnCut', I doubt any of the parental grumblings are anything more than moral outrage at what our neighbor's children are watching.
It is onerous to me. I enjoy making small quick games and releasing them into the wild. I'm not too keen on having a regulatory body evaluate my next version of 'dodge the dot' or whatever it is called.
If a parent is worried that my 'Dodge the Dot' game is simply a cover for a bloodorgy of violence, then they can take heart in the fact that my game is not rated and simply, not buy it.
Please put a label on it so I can decide if it is appropriate for an 8 year old.
Then don't buy games without labels for 8 year olds. You have that option NOW.
However, if I were to develop some software and decide to sell it, do I now have to send it to the rating board for review? How much will it cost me? How long will it take?
Could you tell me if Microsoft Flight Simulator counts as a game, or software? What about Edu-tainment software? Must that be rated? I enjoy playing with Photoshop, it is a form of entertainment for me. Should that be rated?
What about games that only require an internet browser to play? Are those going to be rated?
But again, I want to know why I should submit my software to a review board before I am allowed to offer it to the public.
How are the games rated? By forcing the publishers to utilize a rating system or face their works being barred from sale in that state then you are limiting their right to publish works without being subjected to government 'approval'.
Not only that, but if what he stated was true, then the US congress could coerce the state governments into passing laws that were in violation of the Constitution of the United States.
It was definately Caine and NOT Freeman.
I actually didn't mind the raspy voice when I thought about it a bit.
Here you have a billion dollar playboy trying to summon up the most gruff voice he could, and not really being able to pull it off. Remember that this is 'young' Batman as well. Typically any voice actor you see that does the 'villain' voice has more than half a century under his belt.
IE: Tony Jay
So as Bruce Wayne ages, so will the Batman voice.
It was either have a tough guy try to play a billionaire playboy, or have someone who looks like a billionaire playboy try to act like Batman. And the more 'authentic' version IS having the young guy try to sound 'tough'.
but you know it won't end well for anyone other than him.
And since he is fairly nihilistic as well, we don't even know that for sure.
I'd argue that the Joker was the real 'star' of this film. I suppose he was a supporting actor, but he stole the show.
that was what I was thinking in the back of my mind. At my company, we are facing a bit of a crunch right now. We had a hiring lull for a period of 10-15 years. The result is that we have a bunch of 20 somethings, and 50+ somethings. It is great for someone like me since the opportunity to advance is much easier. Unfortunately, it is very difficult cramming in all of the knowledge from my coworker before he leaves. And lets just say that cramming about the 'lessons learned' from the Apollo missions is definately a firehose treatment. And since he has first hand engineering knowledge from it, that doesn't place him in even the 50-something age range.
The point is, with space, you really do run the risk of starting from zero if you don't keep it going and keep the information flowing from one generation to the next.
I agree with you completely. If you don't like the manner in which these laws are written, or the constitution allows (or doesn't allow) them, then you have to change the law/constitution. What is popular or preferred as the outcome to the case doesn't matter.
I was deeply turned off by the NY Times editorial on the Heller case. They basically tried to claim that the Supreme Court is going to be to blame for every homicide in the future, and a sort of 'how dare they not consider how evil firearms are'. The thing was definately the rantings of a very opinionated editor with little understanding of what purpose the Supreme Court serves.