If Nadia Plesner was a photographer, and used a Louis Vuitton bag on the arm of a victim (well, refugee, or some equivalent alternative) in the same way, LV wouldn't have any claim of violating their IP.
You make an excellent point that I missed before, namely that this is cutting out streaming competition. They explicitly state that TV usage (which is still streamed through the same connection) is exempt from the tally. Doesn't a household pulling down four TV shows (two in HD) at-a-time hit the network harder than someone downloading from Hulu/Netflix/BT/etc.?
I was very upset to hear this news over the weekend. I've been with U-Verse for a long while now, and this makes me want to switch. I don't know how close or not I come to the barrier, but knowing that it's out there is troublesome to me.
As the article points out, there isn't much competition in the marketplace, and I live in central Houston! As I also understand it, Comcast already put limits on their connections, so the only high-speed alternative isn't any better. If I really want to do anything about it, I need to move to another continent.
I remember a time when if security opened your bag, they did it in front of you. You could see everything they did, and they could watch you, if they were clever enough to see if something made you nervous. That means you could make sure they didn't steal anything, and also that anything that was carefully packed for protection remained that way.
While the theft is disturbing, I'm curious how much stuff gets damaged by TSA hastily rifling through a suitcase, then not bothering to put things back properly.
The team that made that computer did a heck of a job. It's a remarkable achievement.
I know people claim it had some speed advantage, but I'm certain the team who designed the thing would've calibrated it to have a normal human reaction time/delay to the input. It wouldn't be a valid test of the system if it was always able to ring in first. They wouldn't need people to compete against if all they wanted to do was see if it could answer questions.
Re: Re: I'm really not a fan of something with two protons being called "hydrogen", ...
A different number of electrons makes it an ion, not a different element. (A different number of neutrons would make something it an isotope.) The atom's elemental name is always determined by the atomic number.
This is neither a isotope, nor a normal ion. It's something new, and should be given a new name accordingly. The fundamental Chemistry 101 rules of nomenclature shouldn't be violated though.
This seems like the worst of all ways to handle a record label. The band is ceding (a certain amount of) creative control to the "label"/fans still, which isn't good for creativity.
On top of that, the funding is provided by your fan base, so they're financially invested in the choices being made. The problem is, you're going to disappoint whoever is in the minority of the decisions made. In the past, the label had a say because it's their money. Now, it's you have a say, provided you have the popular opinion.
I foresee lots of fans who pay their share and then don't get anything for it. I see lots of them being upset with the band as a result.
I think it's important to test the proposed solutions to see if they if they're effective. My suspicion is that these backscatter machines will be proven ineffective, and thus not worth the cost/hassle/etc.
A metal detector and well-trained people interviewing every passenger is far more effective than the nonsense we trot out in this country.
If we don't have an ability to know what a terrorist might see as an opportunity, why are we doing any of this? If you rely on a fence, you need to know where the holes are in it.
Terrorists will figure out the holes. That's their job. It's important we find them first. The more people you let test the system (or at least the data set), the more likely someone will help you find a problem with it, before it really becomes a problem.
The other question such a refusal raises in some people's minds is if the test images would show that they don't really work/show what they would have us believe they show. In other words, is this really a Wizard of Oz kind of power.
I'm not saying it is. I just don't know what the review process was for this, and who had to sign off on the technology to get it approved. I'm sure lots of people would ooh and ahh at seeing a gun clearly defined in an example run, but that isn't a difficult item to pick out. We've been able to find them for ages with basic metal detectors.
I hope I'm not sounding like -- or turning into -- a conspiracy nut. :P
Is the panto not a neutral party in this situation? Does (s)he leave the theatre and invade France at some point during the performance? How is this diluting or altering the meaning of the symbol in any way?