"...use 10 parallel 10Gbps lasers running at different wavelengths, but they are amazingly expensive.."

From TFA

And by encoding data at 12.5Gbits/sec across four laser beams of differing wavelengths, the connector yields a total bandwidth of 50Gbits/sec, five times that offered by Light Peak.

There's a free app that recognizes similar content in MP3 and other audio files.

Similarity is a useful program that helps you to find and remove similar, duplicate musical files (MP3, WMA, OGG, WAV, FLAC, APE, WV, MPC) with the same or similar sound content, music tags (ID3,WMF,Vorbis). This is the best program where similarity of a sound part is checked, not just music tags or file content (byte to byte comparision). In addition the program analyzes the artist, title, album information from the music tags contained in the audio files and compare these with the appropriate entries in other files.

You can adjust sensivity of searching criteria to find exact or similar files. In this way it is possible to identify similarly titles with smaller differences. Duplicate files can be deleted or browsed. The list of duplicate files can be sorted, exported to playlist, and acted upon.

More at http://www.music-similarity.com/ I wonder if it uses the purported patented technology.

BTW, the assertion of a potential harm being caused by "...explaining how he did it because it 'may be viewed internationally. As a result, [it] may contribute to someone infringing our patents in any part of the world'" is certified bullshit.

All patents are public documents -- they must be public in order to inform the world just exactly what it is that the patent owner actually owns. It's detailed in the Claims section. "If you don't claim it, you don't own it."

Furthermore, a patent must "teach the invention," meaning that anyone "familiar with the art" shall be able to implement the invention with only the descriptions provided. If there actually is a patent for this technology, the cat is out of the bag.

Patent courts in the US are very favorably disposed to inventors -- assuming the technology is actually protected. It sounds like maybe not, and so the bluster and shrill threats.

Wall-E, not just science fiction.

I use FF almost exclusively, especially for the convenience and security provided by its rich set of addons. Not a web designer to any small degree, I don't understand why FF cannot render many sites, like Netflix, correctly. In the case of Netflix I wonder if this is a Netflix problem or Firefox fail. (FF cannot display the delete icon on the Netflix Queue page when the DVD/Bluray drop-down box appears on the same line.)

Certainly Netflix should make their site compatible with FF; but this problem has persisted for more than a year and they show no indication of giving a damn. OTOH, if Netflix conforms to coding "standards," whatever these might be, FF should work. Furthermore, FF renders lots of commerce sites so poorly that text is unreadable.

So I use the IE Tab Plus addon which renders the page with IE. A solution in the "extremely mediocre" category.

Actually, the example I mentioned above does not apply to an Arduino itself, but to an add-on piece of hardware that uses a similar processor. The Arduino language has its own I/O pin functions.

I've been playing with the Arduino and ran into these examples last night. The objective of the macro below is to set (1) or reset (0) a single bit in an 8-bit register. Register PORTH is mapped to 8 pins I/O pins on the Arduino and we want to control one of them: pin 12. This is the code I found. It's very helpful in that it shows register-to-pin mapping. (Pin 12 has previously been set as an output pin.)

   #define SET_PIN12(z)  ((z)>0)? PORTH |= (1 << 3) : PORTH  &= (0 << 3)

   Then usage would simply be like the following:
   SET_PIN12(1); //writes a 1 to PIN12
   SET_PIN12(0); //writes a 0 to PIN12

There are some problems with this. ((z)>0) will not do what the programmer intended if z, an int, is negative. And there's no need to test for Z being non-zero. The expression should be replaced with z alone.

The first statement of the conditional if, (1 << 3) : PORTH, works fine as it sets the desired bit to 1 while leaving the other bits as-is. But PORTH  &= (0 << 3) resets ALL 8 bits to zero. I suspect he was thinking that (0<<3)  is 11110111.
In any case, PORTH  &= 0b11110111 functions properly. (The Arduino language is a subset of C++ with a few additions.) A simpler version is

   #define SET_PIN12(z)  (z ? PORTH |= (1 /</< 3) : PORTH  &= 0b11110111

Another example. This is their code to read an input on pin 13. (Pin 13 has been set as an input pin.)

   #define READ_PIN13(z) ((PINL & 0x08) > 0) ? (z) = 1 : (z) = 0
   Usage would be
   READ_PIN13(temp); //reads 1 or 0 into temp depending on PIN13's state

So we have
   (z) = 0;  // or
   (z) = 1;
being executed. I didn't realize this would compile.

The macro functions correctly but I simplified it and changed its usage from a conditional if to to a simple assignment
   #define READ_PIN13 ((PINL & 0x08) > 0)
   // ...
   temp =  READ_PIN13; //reads 1 or 0 into temp depending on PIN13's state

I was tempted to simply further to

   #define READ_PIN13 (PINL & 0x08)  // returns 0 or 0x08

But since there was a lot of this kind of (proper) code I didn't go that far.

   #define   HIGH   1
   // .....
   temp =  READ_PIN13;
   if (temp == HIGH) {...   // tests temp == 1, versus "true" (non-zero)

After looking through lots of code on the web sites it got me thinking about how easy it is produce C code with unintended consequences.

Collateralized Debt Obligation

From your references, the AVC/H.264 Patent List is a 49 page pdf file. Each page shows about 10 to 20 patent numbers, or around 700 by a quick calculation.

Interestingly, Apple has only one patent.

TFA pertains to high-capacity copiers -- not printers. The word "printer" doesn't even appear in it.

Finally, a comprehensible explanation.

...that can be stretched to align properly.... Any graphics whizzes out there that can expand on this?

There's a free program -- autostitch.exe -- that does a superb job of combining images into a panorama. It's a "demo" but is very suitable for your map-scanning application.

To generate a panorama image, the camera (lens, actually) is kept at one position and panned left/right/up/down to create multiple overlapping images that fully cover the scene. I've combined up to 154 JPGs into a single panorama. It's all automatic, given these considerations: (1) all input images are placed in one folder, (2) at least 1/3rd of each image is overlapped with left/right/above/below images, (3) the camera is kept in portrait-only or landscape-only orientation for all shots, and (4) select Edit/Options setting before you open the folder of input images. Re (4), Options: keep the defaults except for Output Size/Percentage and System Memory. Adjust those to suit your requirements.

But you aren't creating a panorama. You want to stitch map images together. In this case, keep the camera exactly perpendicular to the (glass-covered) map, and move the map in relatively equal increments to achieve sufficient overlap. I suggest about 50% overlap in each direction, meaning that every spot should appear in at least two images horizontally and two vertically.

You will be amazed at the complete absence of any stitching artifacts -- you likely won't notice any at all (assuming adequate overlap). Autostitch automatically determines "adjacency" of images. This means that it makes absolutely no difference in what order or sequence the images are shot, or numbered and named in the folder. It also takes care of slight differences in camera rotation, perspective, amount of zoom, color and light levels without generating visible artifacts! As I say, amazing.

Download th zip, which has test images of a mountain scene and run it with the defaults. The output file is named pano.jpg and located in the input folder.

http://www.pcworld.com/downloads/file/fid,63928-order,1-page,1-c,alldownloads/description.html/

A very pertinent comment.

To be fair, the "Mike & Ike" claim was made by the kid. And he might be lying.

"He might be lying." Might not be. Sometimes you cannot prove that you are not guilty. In this case, the photo quality might be so poor that the candy indeed looks like an illegal drug.

Can you prove that you have never committed murder?

No. You cannot prove it. To do so you would have to account for every brief moment of your life which offered the possibility of killing someone. You could throw a rock off a bridge. Stab a stranger on a dark street. And so on. To prove that you are not guilty of murder you can be required, at least, to provide a solid alibi for every moment of your adult life.

"He might be lying" implies that the mere possibility that you could have committed a crime is sufficient enough to deal with you as if you have committed a crime. And if you can prove otherwise "I was here in your court, your honor" then the date could be changed. And so on, ad infinitum. If that's the principle, then the prosecution does not even have to specify any particulars of a crime.

That's why the burden of proof must lie on the accuser. IOW, the presumption of innocence must be a fundamental principle of justice.

Now I don't claim that you disagree with the presumption of innocence principle. But whether the kid is or isn't lying is simply not significant. It has no standing in how those who wield power should judge or treat him. It nothing more than an opinion that has nothing to do with any material fact.

That's the writing we have to look forward to?

Playboy interview of James Cameron:
PLAYBOY: How much do you get into celebrating your movie heroine's hotness?
CAMERON: Right from the beginning I said, "She's got to have tits," even though that makes no sense because her race, the Na'vi, aren't placental mammals.

No built-in USB port! Plus no SD card reader. In addition to the no built-in camera and no flv support.