It's called "an external hard drive". Plug it in via USB. One terabyte of space for a hundred bucks (probably less, now.)

I sort of disagree. Humans are really, really bad at this kind of management, and a smart computer algorithm can often do better. Just look at the people who disable swap space because "it makes the computer slower". You can't trust humans to manage this optimally, and computers can, in theory at least, generate extremely complicated structures and processes (i.e. "if the user runs this program, he's probably about to be reading this data, so let's get this onto the SSD ASAP.")

It's time to kick ass and browse Usenet, and we're all out of Usenet!

Dude, it's Google. When I worked there I used hundreds of gigabytes as scratch space and then forgot to delete them. How much bandwidth do you think is really used by an average Wifi link? It's not really all that much - I'd be surprised if they ended up with more than a few gigabytes from driving around every day.

And chances are very good that "looking over the data" was a completely automated process. It's not like they're going to have humans pore over gigs of data.

And 1tb of hard drive space costs only about $100, less than 1% of the total copier's cost.

Yes, if they wanted to spend more to do less, that would certainly be an option!

Here's how this sort of thing works.

First, you write some code, and then you test it indoors. Then you debug it until you run out of bugs.

Then you bring it outdoors, with the hardware suite in your passenger seat, and drive it around for a bit. Then you debug that until you run out of bugs.

Then you get someone in a remote location to do the same thing. Then you debug that until you run out of bugs.

Then you hire a few cars to drive around for a day or two. Then you debug that until you run out of bugs.

Then you cover a neighborhood, or a medium-sized city. By this point, it works. Is it missing stuff? Maybe. Is it picking up more than it should be? Maybe. But you think it works, and, honestly, that's all you can ever be sure of.

And then you keep scaling up. You fix bugs as they arise, you carefully test dubious areas, but overall, if it's getting the data you expect, you don't worry about it too much.

I imagine what they did was "record everything to a file", and then, later, "scan that file for beacons". In reality, they should have been doing "record beacons to a file", and then "read that file", but I can certainly see how the mistake was made.

Only because nobody's bothering to mine nuclear fuel - and nobody's bothering to mine it because the stockpiles are a cheaper source of it.

Is that this changes absolutely nothing whatsoever.

Pirated videos? Invariably re-encoded into something smaller. Bam! Checksum completely obliterated!

Videos provided by the PR firm, placed on Youtube? Invariably re-encoded into something smaller. Bam! Checksum completely obliterated!

Videos ripped straight off the DVD or Blu-Ray disc, byte for byte, then redistributed? Data not changed! Bam! Checksum . . . completely intact!

So as I understand it, detecting an unauthorized video with MPEG 7 means you have to download it, determine what it's actually a video of if the checksum is utterly missing, and then, even if the checksum isn't missing, determine if it was authorized. This differs from the current approach, where you have to download it, determine what it's actually a video of no matter what, and then, despite the fact that it never had a checksum which would probably be gone now anyway, determine if it was authorized.

Can anyone out there describe a form of copyright infringement that this actually helps detect?

One that isn't invented for the sole purpose of being detected by this technique?

It's behavior like this that has kept me from buying Space Hulk or any Warhammer 40k minis. I haven't even picked up any of the Dawn of War games since I found out what they've been doing.

You hear me, Games Workshop? I am your ideal customer. I have lots of money and I want to give you some of it. But I'm not going to until you stop being a goddamn asshole.

I'm defending "flash programmers" because I, someone who used C++ for many years but has since switched to Lua due to the spectacularly higher ease of writing code, am hit by the same policy changes.

Yes, Flash is what's making the big waves, but this isn't about Flash - this is about Apple's ability to control what tools you use to develop iPhone apps.

True, admittedly. There's downsides.

Should've just emailed the developer asking for a paypal address, handed him the appropriate amount of money, then torrented it.

Everything else on the planet if you say free it means it don't cost you money

Free love?

Free Tibet?

Free Mitnick?

. . . Free Willy?

After all, gas mileage is the most critical thing when people choose their method of transportation. That's why nobody drives cars, and everyone takes public transportation.

C'mon. If I were able to halve my transport time, I would gladly pay an extra 40% for fuel. Those are the numbers your page shows. It's a no-brainer for most people. It would expand our range and save us time, and it turns out that is what people focus on.

Otherwise, we'd all be using public transportation already.

Woman Claims Nerve Damage Caused Persistent Sexual Arousal Syndrome. Doctors Unsurprised.

Woman Further Claims That Falling On The Floor Can Cause Nerve Damage. Doctors Still Unsurprised.

Woman Then Observes That Balancing On A Small Piece Of Plastic Can Result In Falling On The Floor. Doctors Remain Unsurprised.

Hey, you know what else can "cause" persistent sexual arousal syndrome? Basically anything.