Forgot your password?

+ - DigitalGlobe Images it's newest Satellite launch->

Submitted by chromaexcursion
chromaexcursion (2047080) writes "DigitalGlobe recently launched it's newest satellite, which features 31cm resolution (just over 12 inches).
The images were taken from another DigitalGlobe satellite. A neat way of demonstrating what you can do when you own multiple satellites.
The new satellite has the highest resolution imaging capability of any civilian satellite.
There's a good video of the launch at the bottom of the page"

Link to Original Source

Comment: Re:In a nutshell: (Score 2) 239

by chromaexcursion (#47652801) Attached to: Patents That Kill
Not specifically a written law.
The practice started in Rome in the first couple centuries BC. Powerful men were granted license to exclusively produce something. Sometimes it was because they were doing something new. Sometimes because they owned the mine. Patent didn't mean new, just verified.
The meaning of words change over time.
As for the patent system, England did not invent it. Look to Italy.

Comment: Re:No towers in range? (Score 5, Interesting) 127

by chromaexcursion (#47610769) Attached to: T-Mobile Smartphones Outlast Competitors' Identical Models
When a phone has signal, the back channel includes information about neighboring cells. So, it knows where to look for the next back channel. Only a few frequencies to tune to. The problem starts when contact is lost. Phones use power looking for a signal. Re-tuning the receiver is not free.
They continuously tune over a series of frequencies looking for one. And keep cycling through them.
This bitter cycle of finding nothing uses up a phones battery very quickly. Before smart phones it was the single largest power user.
This is an OLD problem. It was well known in the industry in 1990.

I started writing software for cell phone companies in 1990. I learned more than I ever wanted to know about how cell phones work. Moved on to a different industry in 2000. Some things don't change. At least not quickly.

Comment: Re:Security by obscurity (Score 1) 112

Someone who has a problem with private code voted my initial post down to troll.
What I was trying to point out is that private encryption can be much more secure than public.
obviously there needs to be oversight.
A carefully managed system with a private encryption system can be very safe, and far less costly than an open one. But it does mean you can't publish the code.
Given the recent heartbleed issue. How secure is open source?

Comment: Security by obscurity (Score -1, Troll) 112

A system that few know is far more secure than an open one.
Quit trying to find fault with those who legitimately desire security over openness. Not every close system is suspect.
The stupidest mickey mouse cypher will thwart some of the best hackers, if they don't know the algorithm.
For those that say the count must be open. How can a secret ballot be open? At some point you have NO control. You HAVE to trust someone. If you don't, go home.
Rigging elections is ancient, been done for thousands of years. Computers are just the new toy on the block.
It comes down to if the people that run the system want to game it they can. Actually it's easier to mess with paper ballots. Messing with software leaves a trail.

Comment: Energy Use? too short a time frame (Score 1) 710

I've been deliberately conserving my energy use. Adding insulation. Only using room air conditioners (Any one with central air needs to get a clue). For over 2 decades.
Not perfect, but trying to strike a balance. The AC runs less than a few weeks a year.
I'm not sure what this study is about. Probably someone is trying to game the system.

Comment: Re:It was bound to happen (Score 1) 163

For the guy that's done time. Most likely he has to admit he has.
For the average person caught in this, this isn't likely to make a big difference. They can't afford the costs of trying to have their records hidden. And for the most part, no one cares, beyond the obvious.
This is about RICH, WEALTHY, individuals who have been reasonably damned, and want to hide it.
Can't sue for slander in the US if it's true.
The EU seems to have a different opinion of past records.
Not that it really maters. The EU ban only applies to EU sites. Simple enough to proxy around to get the details. It only deters the casual browser.

It's a brave new world. Despite some country's laws, you don't have the right to be forgotten. Until every country enacts such laws, you're out.
There are other similar battles, will be interesting to see which island wins.

If you have to ask how much it is, you can't afford it.