Re: Rounded corners
Apple will now sue Chooseco for breaching its design patent on rounded corners.
To find out if chooseco survive the lawsuit turn to Page 20.
2242 posts • joined 11 Jun 2007
I figured "drowning" was just a euphemism...
Although it raises a question what do you actually die of if you get taken by a croc? Since they barrel roll you until you run out of air, I guess technically you do drown before you get eaten. So I guess drowning could be correct after all...
Im honestly curious here about something, if anyone knows more please respond below.
So someone starts uploading dodgy content (dodgy/disgusting/distressing/illegal content). Its flagged by the AI or even by a real person. And the upload is blocked. What happens then? From the sounds of it nothing.
What should happen? Well in my humble opinion, a) account of the uploader blocked, b) the IP address of the uploader recorded, c) if the content is actually illegal (and im guessing most of the truly distressing stuff is whether its because its video of actual criminal activity or just falls foul of various obscentiy laws), then the IP address is passed over to the cops. The police can then obtain necessary warrants, and go arrest these people.
This would result in a few improvements to the anti-social media environment - a) those workers who have to actually peruse all this distressing content would probably suffer less mental illness (if you know that the people uploading this are being brought to justice and that your actions are making the world a better place, then you can withstand a lot more than knowing all you can do is play whack-a-mole without consequence for the bastards), and b) people would be less willing to upload/share this stuff if they were expecting a knock on the door from PC Plod. Everyone wins.
I half expect at least a few commentards to start banging on about "Freedom of Speech" yadda yadda, but two things - a) facebook blocks this stuff already, and there is no requirement for facebook to allow your bollocks on its platform, and b) if the best thing you can say about what your saying is, that its not technically illegal to say it, then you really dont have much of an argument.
Whilst IP Address searches are not going to stop the hardcore wackos uploading stuff, those using VPN's, tunnels, or those coming from countries with no laws on this stuff, etc. the vast majority that reshare these videos are doing it from their own accounts and own residences. Stopping those secondary sources, stops these things spreading beyond their fringe element. And that has to be worthwhile...
I have to say I disagree with your statements (and those of the Commentards repsonding to you) . Almost all of the bad behaviour you talk about is based on a specific aspect "that a product is desirable and is therefore addictive", which is nonsense.
Your first paragraph seems to resent that fact that we have to pay for games. Somehow paying for a game is something evil to you? Do you feel this way about books or music? Spotify is a streaming service with a paid for licence, and drm, and microtransactions. Is it something that should be listed as an "addiction"? Obviously No. Same with movie streaming services. Just because that is the way people buy a product now, does not make it in anyway bad or an enabler of addiction.
Your second paragraph is basically saying because we dont have a physical copy of a game that causes people to become addicted to it. Which is frankly a non-sensical argument. Were people addicted to hiring movies at Blockbuster? They couldnt own the movies, they only had them for a limited time, and if they wanted to have them for longer they had to pay more. Did it increase addiction on movies? I doubt it. Likewise your 80's acarde example. People (ok lets be honest here Kids) might have wasted there pocket money on arcade games (you could argue thats the point of pocket money), but would you really consider it an addiction - were kids suddenly selling there possessions or getting involved in other crimes in order to feed there arcade habit? No. It might have been seductive marketing to have kids spend there money (note THERE money), but it does not count as an addictive product. If you think it does, go and talk to someone with a heroin addiction or an alcohol problem and you will see there's a VERY big difference.
Your third paragraph compares games companies and hollywood to drug dealers and casinos. If you mean in that they offer a desirable product then yeah sure. But trying to compare this to proper addictions especially based off your previous paragraphs is just bollocks.
Your final paragraph, well I frankly dont understand your point. You talk about people being isolated, and yet the most popular games are a) massively multiplayer, so plenty of other people around which you interact with, b) most are free to play or a single one off fee (so not pay per play), and c) things like microtransactions are in most modern games to do with cosmetics (dressing up). They are entirely optional and not pay to win. Online behaviour can be toxic and the group environment can prevent moderation of that, but again thats not whats under discussion here. So it basically is irrelevant.
Frankly, your premise seems to be that because games are now offered as a service, with regular updates and cosmetic accessories, they are now an addictive substance. That is just a ridiculous statement. Just becuase something is desirable doesnt make it addictive (otherwise Apple would have been declared a Class A substance years ago).
As a mechanical aerospace engineer, I know that if I design something and it fails and causes a crash and people die - I go to prison. This makes me a) very careful, and b) VERY much willing to make sure my ass is covered. If I'm overruled by a manager, I make sure to get it in writing. It's also why, everything I design gets checked by stress engineers, all drawings are checked by another design engineer, plus manufacturing get involved, etc. There are a lot of checks and balances to make sure that mechanical failures do not bring down an aircraft. Basically, because none of us want to go to prison or have that guilt on our conscience.
I have to admit, I've yet to meet a software engineer, in any industry, who has that mentality. So I'm afraid to say, I would not be surprised if the software didnt have a multiple eyes, multiple discipline check of the code.
It does raise an interesting point though, I mean on a mechanical part design, my name is on the part drawing. The checkers name is on the drawing, stress have their own record of files, and manufacturing do as well. Everyone involved in that part is recorded, and so when it fails we get a boot up the ass. How do you record all of that on software? Unless its a very simple program, you're unlikely to have just a single software engineer working on it for the lifetime of the project. How do you show who put the dodgy line of code in, and when? Why did they do it ? Was it checked? How do you PROVE the code was checked? Considering that we will in the foreseeable future have automated cars, controlled by software, how do we maintain that level of record keeping that allows people to be held responsible or proven not responsible for the failures that may lead to deaths. Solve that tracking problem and you'll like earn a few million down the line.
This is actually one of the biggest topics for disagreement between the Americans and the European regulatos. It's called Grandfathering. The Americans love it, the Europeans do there best to block it.
Basically, it means that for a small change you dont need to recertify the full aircraft. Because recertification is VERY expensive. But then the question becomes whats a small change? And how many small changes before it constitues a new aircraft and needs to be recertified?
As a thought experiment at uni, we were able, under the American rules, with many little steps, to bring a wood and cloth plane from the first world war up to a fully metal enclosed passenger aircraft (think early 50's level) on a single type certificate.
OK in reality, you wouldnt get that far (as someone would eventually show a modicium of sense), but it gives you an idea of the problems with Grandfathering.
Now i dont know enough about the changes between the 737 and the 737 MAX, but maybe it should have been recertified. At the very least, there should have been a much higher level of scrutiny placed on the implementation of this AoA feature. I have absolutely never heard of any system like that which does not use multiple sensors (min 3) and a voting system. To allow a single sensor to control something like this with a foreseeable risk of crashing the aircraft is, well, frankly criminal.
(from a 15 year veteran of the Aerospace industry)
I was once on secondment working in India (from the UK), when that particular project was cancelled. I was told that I needed to move to a suppliers office in Malaysia to take up work on another project. Could i be on the flight this afternoon (it was already about 11am at this point). I said No, as i had to sort out leaving my rented apartment, etc. But I could probably make the one tomorrow afternoon, which would get me into KL about 6am the next day. I was told fine, but I HAD to go into the new office that day, as there was so much work on.
So i dutifully got everything sorted out in India (and set up for coming to Malaysia), caught the flight the next day, arrived at 6am in KL, got to the hotel, showered, jumped in a taxi for the 1 hour trip to Cyberjaya, and promptly fell asleep. Surprisingly, I arrived at the office without any problems. And proceeded to enter.
I was met with a "Who are you? And what are you doing here? We havent been told anyone's coming!". This was followed by the info that a) there was no workplace for me, b) no computer for me, and c) no one had any idea what I was supposed to be doing, and d) they really werent happy to have me on site with them.
So i managed to get some space on an empty desk, and used my personal laptop to send a few emails, and basically surf the internet. No-one back in the UK could tell me what I was supposed to be doing (the manager who had sent me off in such a hurry had gone off on holiday) other than to say that I was to "supervise but not manage" the supplier. Whatever that meant.
I worked a few more hours, caught a taxi back to KL (fell asleep again), showered at the hotel again, went to the pub, met a lovely young lady i spent the next 3 months romancing, and promptly went to bed.
Not a bad 24 hours, all in all, but not something I'd really recommend... ;)
"illegitimate goings-on, looking like a brothel or a funeral parlour"
Illegitimate goings on in a funeral parlour? Damn, I need to get out more often...
I dont know why but I suddenly have the Doug Anthony All Stars playing in my head.... "Necrophilia, Necrophilia, Rigour Mortis makes me hard..."
"populated by Daemons of Darkness who will appear among us at the end times to smite us mightily."
Ahhh, that explains where Putin, Trump, Kim, Farange, May, etc come from. They certainly cant be human, as they all seem to be missing the little thing we call "humanity"...
I find it really hard to believe that Planet 9 exists. With all of the sky surveys we've done, at no point has there been a planet shaped hole moving across the images. And yes i know, even a super Earth at long distance looks very small, but if we're able to detect asteroids in the oort cloud crossing the cameras path, then I'm sure someone would have seen a significantly larger object doing the same thing.
But then again, as the hitchhikers guide says "“Space,” it says, “is big. Really big. You just won’t believe how vastly, hugely, mindbogglingly big it is. I mean, you may think it’s a long way down the road to the chemist’s, but that’s just peanuts to space.”" .
I'm happy to be suprised...
Not a surprise that the RTX's arent selling that much yet - there are (at last check) only 21 games that support the whizz bang Live Ray Tracing effects. Paying a premium for special effects that only appear in 21 games? There are only so many people who are rich/stupid enough to pay for that at launch...
While the MRO data provides a good overview and helped to select a site, the resolution doesnt really tell us anything about what the soil is like. From Wikipedia:
"...[MRO's SHARARD Radar Instrument] allows it to resolve layers as thin as 7 m (23 ft) to a maximum depth of 1 km (0.6 mi). It has a horizontal resolution of 0.3 to 3 km (0.2 to 1.9 mi)."
A resolution of 300m is not great for determining sand grain sizes... ;) :P
The Mole operates basically like a jack hammer. Internally, you have a rotating cam that loads a heavy weight against a spring. At a certain point the spring "slips", releasing the heavy weight with the pent up force of the spring. This sharp shock drives the entire Mole deeper very quickly. The Mole of course bounces back a little bit from this, but at a slower speed where the effect of friction can kick in to grab the Mole and stop it bouncing back to its previous height. Thats the simple version of how it works. :)
As for, do we actually know if it will work - straight up answer - Nope. The mole is strong, it will go through most things so long as it doesnt hit dead on, it will also slide around objects if theres a slope to allow it. It left very nice little furrows in concrete blocks we used for testing just those very scenarios. Still if we hit something dead on, it could be dead in the water, or it could smash its way through - its impossible to know what lies beneath the surface, as Rich Speed writes we havent been deeper than 22cm before. So its all pretty unknown and unknowable.
The Mole itself can be pretty quick, it depends on the soil - i remember one test where we went 5m in about 45mins. When soil conditions are perfect, its fast, other times it can take 12 hours to do the same trip. We just dont know what the soil is like, not exactly. We've designed for a wide variety and tested as many as we could, but you still never know if it works. The talk of a couple of weeks is because every 0,5-1m the Mole will stop for a few days to allow the temperature sensors to do their thing.
A final comment - anything over 3m depth is a successful mission. Science can be done with anything over about 1m if i remember correctly, but 3m means full success. We are actually not allowed to progress beyond 5m. Thats a hard limit put in for planetary protection purposes - to explain that, beyond 5m is so far out of the realm of the known that if we wanted to go further than that, (and technically there is nothing to say the mole couldnt go further with a longer tether), we would have had to go one cleanliness class higher, and that would have upped the costs of the project massively. It just wasnt feasible, so discretion is better part of valour and all that, we'll find out whats past 5m next time... ;)
Hi guys, I can answer this (I'm an ex-InSight HP3 (i.e. the mole) team member). The Seismometer goes first because, they can actually use the shocks we create with the mole to make measurements of the local geology. The shocks we create, whilst not being that large, create waves which can be picked up by Seis and the reflections of those shocks as they travel through the local area can also be picked up.
Please dont ask me for the exact science involved, I'm a mechanical design engineer, not a geologist! Still they're pretty confident that they can get some good readings based on our short sharp shocks...
You've gone to all the trouble of setting up fake accounts, identifying inteliigence operatives, swiped legitimate photos and done all of the hard work of getting those identified intelligence operatives to friend you (and thus identify further people for analysis, etc), and then you go and send a message like that???
It seems the term intelligence agent (on both sides of the conflict) is something of an oxymoron....
Just curious - if all traffic into russia must go through russian government controlled servers, then I'm assuming all outgoing traffic must also pass through those servers. So if we simply block those servers, that should cut out all of those russian hackers, scammers, and phishers right? Well until they add in some vpn tunneling or what not, but it would at least take care of the lazy ones... Thoughts on a postcard...
If you're trying to convince the boss that he really should be forking out for a professional to do all this, turning up in full Scuba kit - Tank, regulator, dry suit, face mask - should work a treat. It might also convince him to get the cleaners in more regularly as well, which is rarely a bad thing...
"so that people in Germany continue to benefit fully from all our services".
I'm looking really hard, but I can't quite see how Facebook collecting reams about my surfing habits, and creepily following me around the internet is going to help me "benefit fully" from their services...
I'm not sure they're using the word "benefit" correctly there...
I dont know if he did what it has been said he did and frankly i dont care. BUT he has not been charged with commiting any crime in the UK. Is it right then that the Police can hold on to his stuff for FIVE years and not return it?
Either they charge him, at which point the stuff is evidence and is treated the same as anything else until such point as he is either found guilty or acquitted. Or they decline to charge him, and he should then get all of his things back.
The Police should not be able to hold on to your possessions just because they MAY decide to charge you with something in the future. In fact, there are laws against that, which is exactly what he's requesting are enforced. I would think that any reasonable person, would agree with that sentiment.
It's been a year since his extradition was denied, either the Police should charge him now and give him his day in court, or they return his equipment and leave him alone for good.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019