There is a video that discusses Margaret Hamilton, the changing nature of computers during the early Apollo era, the source code for the Apollo 11 lander, and a simulator to examine the software operating.
I thought the comments in the source code were funny and showed Margaret had a good sense of humor about how the program was supposed to work.
Agreed. An orchestra can record a performance of a public domain song and claim copyright to their performance. An artist can use open source software to create a copyrighted work of art. An author can use FOSS software to write a story or book and claim copyright on the work.
If someone creates something using AI, the SCOTUS has ruled that the AI cannot own the copyright. The individual that submitted the prompt, reviewed the game, tweaked the prompt, tested again, decided that the work matched their intention CAN claim copyright on the result. The tool doesn't define what is copyrightable, it is the human or team that receives the copyright.
And I learned they have a social security program with unique numbers the hackers can steal. Is theirs also funded by currently working individuals paying for seniors like in the US?
The Kindle has thought of this and has a few features that make things easier.
1. Just tap the upper-right corner of the page to create a bookmark for that page. You can later view your bookmarks, jump to them, or erase them.
2. Highlight a paragraph or section of the page you're reading. You can review, jump to, or clear the highlights later.
3. Create your own notes to review later. You can add notes like "proves earlier occupation" or longer entries
4. Search for text. If you are on page 456 and remember somewhere previously in the book it mentioned geode crystals, you can search for that phrase to find it
Kindle bookmarks, notes, and highlights
I understand that an ereader is not perfect for research, but knowing what features are built in can help make it slightly easier to use
This reminds me of the opportunity in the 70s to get in on the ground floor of a new "Air Filtration System". I could elect to be paid salary or, the better option they said, by commission. Just attend the free training and sign up.
I found this was a tactic to recruit door-to-door salespeople for "Rainbow Vacuums".
** Rainbow vacuums basically married a shop vac with a bong. https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
But the pool is getting smaller. So many Windows-only applications are moving to browser-based portals that the underlying OS is becoming less relevant.
You can now run online versions of CAD, designing software, video editing, image editing, programming IDEs, 3D slicers, CRM, accounting, and the whole document management suite (word, excell, powerpoint, etc.) regardless of OS. All you need is a standard browser. The website doesn't care if you are running from Windows, MacOS, Linux, Android, or ChromeOS.
I viewed it as a matter of definition. It's like saying "No matter how bright, an LED can't be an incandescent lamp."
The two studies aren't very representative of what I consider mainstream users. Both studies appear to be run on a Mac Mini running Firefox 146 (current version is 155). CPU and memory usage appear to be more dependent on the OS than the individual browsers. Very little data is available for Brave Desktop on Windows, or Brave for Android on mobile devices.
Claiming a program needs a specific amount of memory for their tests also seems OS dependent. My running copy of Firefox with multiple tabs and private windows is only using half of the claimed 1.65GB for Firefox (847MB). Open windows in Amazon, Slashdot, and Google don't need the memory amount their tests claim is needed for their test page.
Granted, I am running both uBlock Origin and Privacy Badger so some of my memory usage might be reduced by those tracking and ad blockers, but I think most users of any browser will have installed similar blocking software when available.
If their claim is the built-in blocking features of Brave are better than the clean installed versions of Chrome, Edge, and Firefox, then the test results should be a little more specific about their conclusion.
Critically short career fields have Selective Reenlistment Bonuses (SRB). Those careers that are critically undermanned, have extremely long training programs, or require unique skills (SEALs, submarine nuclear technicians, cybersecurity, critical language linguists, etc.) will pay bonuses to entice members to reenlist.
The bonus is calculated by the member's monthly base pay x number of years reenlisting x SRB multiplier. An E-5 earning $4000 a month that reenlists for 6 years in a career field with an SRB multiplier of 3 could receive a SRB bonus of $72,000. This bonus is paid with 50% at the reenlistment and the remaining partial percentage paid each year. Reenlisting for 6 years would give 50% at signing, then 12.5% at year 2,3,4,5.
SRB bonuses are normally highest at the first reenlistment time frame. Members that reenlist for 6 years to get the maximum bonus are usually advance to the 10 year point in their career and at that point most of them will normally continue to the 20 year retirement without needing an added incentive. A critical career with a SRB multiple of 3 during the windows of 4-6 years might drop to an SRB bonus multiple of 1, 0.5, or 0 for years after 8.
True, in fact it might give a word-for-word translation round trip, which would defeat the purpose of trying to get rid of the watermarked phrasing.
Without knowing exactly which phrase in a 10-ish page document is the watermarked phrase, you would have to hope the translating round trip would remove or modify the phrase without introducing translation or logical errors. Overall I don't think using Google translate would be as helpful as he hoped.
What is the difference between this and RADAR?
In RADAR the transmitting and receiving systems are controlled by the same system. That system determines when to transmit and when to listen with time of flight giving the range and directional antennas giving rough angle to the reflection.
In this technique, the WiFi transmitters are always transmitting and the receivers are trying to gather information from the interference caused by people obstructing the signal. Imagine having fairly powerful lights at one end of a room and a translucent sheet blocking the middle of the room. This technique is trying to resolve individuals based on their shadows on the translucent sheet. Different WiFi transmitters will be beamforming toward and adjacent to people and the receivers are trying to resolve two or three similar shadows into a composite associated with a unique individual.
The Outer Space Treaty was signed almost 60 years ago and covers many of these concerns.
Watermark removal is available for almost no cost now. Google Translate and then back.
Depending on the language you choose, that's probably not going to work as well as you assume.
Random sample from the web:
Electric cars are the future in the auto industry. As climate change gets worse, governments are going to start
limiting the number of gasoline cars being built. The cost of gas will continue to rise, which will make it harder for
people to afford to run gas powered cars. As battery technology improves, electric cars will be able to travel
further on a charge and cost less to buy. Eventually most gas powered cars will be replaced by electric cars.
Translated to Japanese and back. Other languages will give different round trip translations:
Electric vehicles are a future for the automobile industry. As technology advances, national governments will begin to drastically
reduce the production of gasoline vehicles. Gasoline cars will continue to improve, and gasoline cars will become more readily available.
Electric vehicles, which do not require a battery technology factory, will be able to operate more efficiently with just one battery,
and their cost will also decrease. In short, most gasoline cars are no different from electric vehicles.
You are correct - sending the original text through Google Translate will most definitely get rid of AI watermarks. It will also get rid of any meaningful information compared to the original text.
Specifically, when you try to open an ODF in an M$ product, you get a screenfull of FUD claiming it's malware, designed to scare away any non-technical user.
My version of MS Office 2016 doesn't give any alert when I open a sample copy of a
I can't verify what happens with the newer O365 versions because I refuse to "rent" my software from MS.
ODT is an open standard. If you open the file in a text editor you will see the first two letters are PK (RIP Phil Katz) Microsoft's
I assume thr 'drones in TFA are the typical home-gamer quad-copters... unless we're talking a big 'un, or a hex or even octo, it's not gonna have remotely close to enough battery to even get up to so-and-so altitude, let alone hang around long enough to gather data for an extended time period
Wow! You know you wouldn't have to ASSUME anything if you would just RTFA!
Did you hear that two rabbits escaped from the zoo and so far they have only recaptured 116 of them?
