We probably couldn't do it with satellites â" man-made structures simply aren't big enough to be measured that way
Really.
[Ground Sample Distance] for Intelligence/Military purposes, such as the National Reconnaissance Office programs, may have a resolution of less than a centimeter with the potential for real-time (live) imaging.
Do you know any cities that are less than a centimeter across?
Completely preposterous. I might buy that the surface is slightly higher, but only because of ocean currents being deflected upwards by the seamounts. But there's no way the presence of a mountain "increases gravity in the area" enough to actually see the water level rise.
What. Using GPS to determine which tower to use is a terrible idea. What are you thinking? You'd have to map out all of america's landscape for which areas get best reception from which tower, and update it every time you add a tower or build a large building, and hope nobody ever goes inside anywhere. Nice solution when the phone can just look at signal strength directly.
Also I don't see why everyone expects the phone to connect to domestic towers before the cruise ship's internal network. The phone is simply using the best connection available. It would have been impressive for engineers to have thought of weird cases like the cruise ship, but I wouldn't expect it. In fact, actually implementing a satellite-based internal cell network is impressive. In any case that idea came long after CDMA was designed -it's tacked-on in a sense- and there's bound to be problems.
AT&T shouldn't charge him thousands, but he did use a lot of very expensive satellite bandwidth.
If he wants Jaunty so much why doesn't he just use it? It's not officially released yet but obviously it exists. There are daily builds available for download.
Good point, but I have to point out that interest in Gnutella was massive, while fewer people are interested in the inconvenience, high latency, and very low bandwidth of this kind of darknet.
This whole sub thread is off topic. The point is that you can't just sit back and smugly say "well they fired me but they lost an experienced worker and they'll suffer in the long run" because firing workers can sometimes actually give them massive profits.
All very blah. Check out some screenshots of OneSwarm. Slick! Plus you can access the web interface remotely, and play video and audio files from the network directly in the web interface. And you can exchange keys with trusted friends automatically via Google Talk, and there's a gmail-esque friends request interface. The coolest thing though is the fine tuned control you have over distribution.. you can control which friends and which groups you allow which shares to route through.
If nobody's out there promoting it with a website and support and a download link, few people will participate and it will slowly die.
You'd need kind of a large critical mass before the network can sustain its growth just by nodes emailing friends the source. A lot more than just "up and running".
Ouch. Well there is the argument that if someone's seeding bandwidth is being monopolized by RIAA bots on an illegal torrent then they have less bandwidth to seed on legal stuff. Even serving up fake data can harm legit swarms, since downloading is also good for the network.
I think you're completely wrong. It doesn't matter if you know someone will commit a crime if you're not actually helping them do it then you haven't done anything wrong (more appropriately, you haven't done anything illegal). See my links above: even if you're sitting there watching someone being beaten to death, as long as you don't toss the guy a tire iron or throw a punch you're not doing anything illegal. They certainly can't convict you for beating her since you didn't, and the charge "didn't help someone in danger" only applies if you're the one who created the situation in the first place or if you're an on-duty paramedic or police officer who could save her. All in the US of course.
More like there's an area downtown with tons of bootlegging activity, which draws thousands of people into town on the weekends, so people pay you to put up posters in the area advertising their stuff to all the people walking by.
I think most of us would agree that sending out a spam linking to a site that will zombie your PC should be illegal.
I wouldn't. It's just a link, and the site is just data that interacts with your computer exactly the way the software was designed. Laws that make malware illegal are equivalent to the craziness of illegal numbers. Distribution of information should in no cases be illegal. Sale can be regulated of course since it's only laws that make it possible in the first place, but not distribution in general. The obvious counterexample is child pornography but I'm not sure that's even valid; it's disgusting of course but on theoretical grounds I don't think free distribution of it hurts anyone.
I never understood this statement. If you're doing your job well enough that they want you on their payroll, there's nothing wrong. If the company wants you to work harder then they increase their expectations.
When employers rake in 9 or 10 digits, there's no such consolation. People can find other jobs, but it hardly affects the business and there's a huge pool to replace them. Times have to be really good before there's nobody applying to be a replacement.
Like my AC parent above I don't know about the current "Permissive License" but the shared source licenses only allowed you to look at the source to "educate" yourself on how certain components of Windows worked (and lots of it was too secrety to release); you couldn't change it and recompile it. So no flexibility, only education that Microsoft would sue your children out of their inheritance for if you tried writing competing systems code after looking at theirs.
Slashdot Mirror
Really.
Do you know any cities that are less than a centimeter across?
Completely preposterous. I might buy that the surface is slightly higher, but only because of ocean currents being deflected upwards by the seamounts. But there's no way the presence of a mountain "increases gravity in the area" enough to actually see the water level rise.
Signal strength affects battery life and I imagine dropped packets; voice shouldn't be affected but data transfers could take longer.
What. Using GPS to determine which tower to use is a terrible idea. What are you thinking? You'd have to map out all of america's landscape for which areas get best reception from which tower, and update it every time you add a tower or build a large building, and hope nobody ever goes inside anywhere. Nice solution when the phone can just look at signal strength directly.
Also I don't see why everyone expects the phone to connect to domestic towers before the cruise ship's internal network. The phone is simply using the best connection available. It would have been impressive for engineers to have thought of weird cases like the cruise ship, but I wouldn't expect it. In fact, actually implementing a satellite-based internal cell network is impressive. In any case that idea came long after CDMA was designed -it's tacked-on in a sense- and there's bound to be problems.
AT&T shouldn't charge him thousands, but he did use a lot of very expensive satellite bandwidth.
If he wants Jaunty so much why doesn't he just use it? It's not officially released yet but obviously it exists. There are daily builds available for download.
Good point, but I have to point out that interest in Gnutella was massive, while fewer people are interested in the inconvenience, high latency, and very low bandwidth of this kind of darknet.
Who cares?
This whole sub thread is off topic. The point is that you can't just sit back and smugly say "well they fired me but they lost an experienced worker and they'll suffer in the long run" because firing workers can sometimes actually give them massive profits.
All very blah. Check out some screenshots of OneSwarm. Slick! Plus you can access the web interface remotely, and play video and audio files from the network directly in the web interface. And you can exchange keys with trusted friends automatically via Google Talk, and there's a gmail-esque friends request interface. The coolest thing though is the fine tuned control you have over distribution.. you can control which friends and which groups you allow which shares to route through.
I'm sure most slashdotters know people on IRC who at least aren't RIAA lawyers..
No, he's talking about the largest neo-nazi party in Sweden.
No, the internet interprets censorship as Ben Franklin and routes around him.
If nobody's out there promoting it with a website and support and a download link, few people will participate and it will slowly die.
You'd need kind of a large critical mass before the network can sustain its growth just by nodes emailing friends the source. A lot more than just "up and running".
Ouch. Well there is the argument that if someone's seeding bandwidth is being monopolized by RIAA bots on an illegal torrent then they have less bandwidth to seed on legal stuff. Even serving up fake data can harm legit swarms, since downloading is also good for the network.
Woowwww paranoid ramblings..
I think you're completely wrong. It doesn't matter if you know someone will commit a crime if you're not actually helping them do it then you haven't done anything wrong (more appropriately, you haven't done anything illegal). See my links above: even if you're sitting there watching someone being beaten to death, as long as you don't toss the guy a tire iron or throw a punch you're not doing anything illegal. They certainly can't convict you for beating her since you didn't, and the charge "didn't help someone in danger" only applies if you're the one who created the situation in the first place or if you're an on-duty paramedic or police officer who could save her. All in the US of course.
Since when is aiding and abetting illegal? Remember,
More like there's an area downtown with tons of bootlegging activity, which draws thousands of people into town on the weekends, so people pay you to put up posters in the area advertising their stuff to all the people walking by.
I wouldn't. It's just a link, and the site is just data that interacts with your computer exactly the way the software was designed. Laws that make malware illegal are equivalent to the craziness of illegal numbers. Distribution of information should in no cases be illegal. Sale can be regulated of course since it's only laws that make it possible in the first place, but not distribution in general. The obvious counterexample is child pornography but I'm not sure that's even valid; it's disgusting of course but on theoretical grounds I don't think free distribution of it hurts anyone.
I never understood this statement. If you're doing your job well enough that they want you on their payroll, there's nothing wrong. If the company wants you to work harder then they increase their expectations.
When employers rake in 9 or 10 digits, there's no such consolation. People can find other jobs, but it hardly affects the business and there's a huge pool to replace them. Times have to be really good before there's nobody applying to be a replacement.
The fully-documented XML-based format that they tried to get adopted as a fully Open standard was created to slow them down?
Like my AC parent above I don't know about the current "Permissive License" but the shared source licenses only allowed you to look at the source to "educate" yourself on how certain components of Windows worked (and lots of it was too secrety to release); you couldn't change it and recompile it. So no flexibility, only education that Microsoft would sue your children out of their inheritance for if you tried writing competing systems code after looking at theirs.