Yes, I have a laptop.
I'd rather have fun and live to 70, than spend an extra 30 years drooling in a nursing home.
It depends completely on why I'm drooling...
Kudos to those running the experiment. Cheap labor is great.
I believe the $20.000 comes as a bonus to their regular pay.
So... Kudos to those running the experiment. Cheap labor is great.
Isn't this "reward" added to the money they already get? As I understand it, it's not like they are doing the experiment for free. The experiment is their job and the $20.000 is a bonus if they complete the experiment. It's just to motivate the crew to try to stay the whole experiment.
Lawsuit from what? Slowing down P2P traffic which is mostly illegal downloads anyways?
So in essence, you say that those damned WoW players can blaim themselves for giving money to a company that uses a technology which is "mostly used for illegal downloads". Yes. That should teach them.
So these kids "hanging out" in the malls; better or worse than joining a raid online? What about the 3 meatbags spread out on the floor in front of the TV watching Nth season of American Idol. Is that so very healthy?
Yes, sports is healthy. Yes, talking face to face is healthy, but using your brains during gaming is also healthy. Nothing is healthy to spend too much time on. Nothing!
Kids today socially interact face-to-face all day at school. If you want to worry, worry about all the elder people that don't understand online communities (games, social websites...) and haven't spoken to anyone for the last 6 days.
Some of his friends are among the anoying kids you meet online that begs for gold just because you are older and have more money. Their parents are ignorant to how they behave online. If they started going out in real life begging for money from strangers, you can bet they would care.
We are now currently socially interacting through slashdot. Is this really so bad? Should we just log off and go out and interact in the "real world" just because online is so different?
> Of course someone who is stripping the exif data will never resize the image and run > some sharpening over the image just to cover their traces, right?
Some will, some won't. Criminals are notoriously careless and stupid.
If you are careless and stupid, how did you remove the EXIF-data? It's difficult enough to find a good EXIF-editor alerady. And if you actually go through all the labour of removing the EXIF-data, you probably would also go through the steps of altering the image. Unless, of course, you are a photo freak and really, really have to use the raw format to capture all the details of your crime.
> Yep, this one was taken by a Canon Powershot A510 of which only 5.7 million were sold. > We also know that this particular model was either sold in North America, Japan, Europe, > Africa, Australia, South East Asia and South America. That should narrow it down.
Yes. Of the 18 initial suspects only two own that camera. Concentrate your investigation on them.
Here, I must agree.
e-credibility: the non-guaranteeable likelihood that the electronic data you're seeing is genuine rather than somebody's made-up crap. - Karl Lehenbauer