Lives in United States Saratoga, CA, United States
Joined on Aug 11, 2010


Total: 60, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »
In reply to:

landscaper1: The police routinely excuse themselves by saying, "We don't write the laws; we just enforce them." (You even hear "the Commissioner" say that on "Bluebloods.") However, the fact is there aren't enough cops to enforce all the laws; there have to be priorities. Considering the vast array of violent criminal activity that's a constant reality in NYC, should enforcing a drone ordinance really command such a high priority?

Cops bemoan the public's general lack of respect and appreciation for them and the job they do, but this is a classic example of how their own actions result in diminished respect for all police officers. Reduced funding for the police is a useful first step, but ultimately what is needed are senior police officials who focus ALL police enforcement activities on what the public is most afraid of, violent crime.

Even if what you say is technically correct - you have no reasonable right to expect that police prioritize enforcement of laws to match your personal preferences. Just like you have no reasonable right to expect being able to get away with driving 90 mph on the freeway, just because the guy in front of you drove 100 and didn't get caught.

Link | Posted on Aug 18, 2020 at 02:24 UTC

Apparently Nikon thinks it's more important to use a D500 as a Webcam than to use it with CFexpress cards. I'd disagree with that, but what do I know.

Link | Posted on Aug 7, 2020 at 01:17 UTC as 15th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

BrentSchumer: In these comments: People who have not read the patent saying "LOL you can't patent the idea of a drone!"

Hint: The patent is for a specific mechanism that DJI is using without license, not quadracopters in general.

The way I read it, the patent is for a copter with two drive shafts - all clockwise-turning rotors are driven by one, all counter-clockwise turning rotors by the other.

Seems to me, then, that this patent would not cover drones with an independent electric motor per rotor, but without shared drive shafts.

But, hey, I am just an engineer, so what do I know.

Link | Posted on May 17, 2020 at 23:54 UTC
On article Hands-on with the Nikon D780 (346 comments in total)
In reply to:

SmilerGrogan: Just this afternoon I shot dozens of perfectly exposed frames of a client using Nikon’s terrifyingly accurate CLS off-camera flash system triggered with the stupid little pop up flash on the top of my camera.
No tedious testing and chimping needed, just throw an SB600 up on a stand and blaze away.
Why has thou forsaken us Nikon? Why?

I remember someone saying, that the built-in flash gets in the way of making the optical viewfinder prism bigger, so because pro cameras optimize for large OVF size, flash has to go.

Link | Posted on Jan 17, 2020 at 02:53 UTC
In reply to:

Aroart: Wow, to funny, did you know fan boy as one word is considered a swear word .. lol..

Well of course... that's sexist! It should be "fanperson" :)

Link | Posted on Jan 5, 2020 at 17:22 UTC

Guess those firmware upgrades that they promised for November to add CFExpress compatibility to D850 et al. aren't coming after all.

Link | Posted on Dec 12, 2019 at 03:52 UTC as 24th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

scrup: So many threatened by a smartphone, like it's going to take away their manhood.

The smartphone has transformed so many peoples lives. If it hasn't transformed your life, all I can say is your probably living the last 20% of your lifespan.

If that phone had fallen from a plane in a more populated place, it might've really transformed some people's life - and not for the better.

Link | Posted on Oct 5, 2019 at 02:55 UTC

Now waiting for next week's DPR article, "Professional Astrophotographer Shoots Jupiter with a Smartphone."

Link | Posted on Aug 31, 2019 at 18:46 UTC as 10th comment | 4 replies
In reply to:

maljo@inreach.com: Blockchain - all the images are on everyone's computer?

Well at least that would guarantee there can be no privacy breaches. There'd be no privacy to breach to begin with.

Link | Posted on Aug 17, 2019 at 22:32 UTC
In reply to:

keeyoni: Yes its wrong for him to use is status and sphere of influence to coerce cooperation. I find Kim Kardashians reaction to be a bit disingenuous in light of her support of a President who pretty much engaged in very same behavior.

That is a very broad interpretation of "coercion" you apply here. For reference, a simple Google search turns up this definition: "Coercion - the practice of persuading someone to do something by using force or threats"

Would you mind pointing out where there was force or threats in play here?

Link | Posted on Jul 26, 2019 at 01:29 UTC
In reply to:

racin06: Only in CA can you be arrested for not painting your replica rifle bright colors. Seriously, it's so absurd that it's very laughable.

Well in other states, they simply shoot you, just to be safe.

Take your pick.

Link | Posted on Jul 6, 2019 at 20:52 UTC
In reply to:

Mortal Lion: I assume that just won't be available in Europe again.

Thank your elected representatives for that.

Link | Posted on Jul 5, 2019 at 15:22 UTC
On article This is the first ever photograph of a black hole (634 comments in total)

The image was obtained using radio telescopes. Therefore, it does not arise from photons, therefore it is not a photograph.

Link | Posted on Apr 11, 2019 at 05:23 UTC as 60th comment | 4 replies

Daily damages of $598 billion?

What a pile of BS - the entire global GDP is only ~$200 billion per day.

Link | Posted on Mar 30, 2019 at 02:41 UTC as 36th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

locke_fc: Don't ever take her photos. Easy.

And no big loss for the world, one might add.

Link | Posted on Mar 28, 2019 at 01:04 UTC
In reply to:

DotCom Editor: Sorry, never heard of her.

There's probably a whole lot of rather important and accomplished people she's never heard of (ah, say, like Srinivasa Ramanujan), so DotCom Editor is in good company.

Link | Posted on Mar 28, 2019 at 01:03 UTC
In reply to:

AlanG: I wonder what would happen if Under Armour decided to shoot a similar image of another basketball player and make a silhouette logo from it.

Trademark law is different from copyright law. You can not copyright a color, but you can trademark it (ask T-Mobile).


Link | Posted on Mar 27, 2019 at 02:45 UTC
In reply to:

M Chambers: It's fair use as it's being used to criticize and is not per say an advertisement even though it really is since it wants to elect the opponent. All political parties do this so it shouldn't be shocking.

Wrong. It's possibly fair use if you use it to criticize the work itself (as in, using movie excerpts to criticize that same movie). Not if you use the work to criticize its subject.

Link | Posted on Mar 21, 2019 at 03:10 UTC
In reply to:

DStudio: I read over 100 of these (300 or so) comments, and they're missing the point:

Erika Peterman is trying to gain undue political leverage.

She's not entitled to say it can only be used by her preferred candidate, once it's become part of the campaign. Fair use means the other side can now use it too. Otherwise she's infringing on the opposing political party's rights.

This is about trying to have unfair political control. When she first contributed the photo to her candidate's campaign, she negotiated the terms and fees. She can't now claim that no one can criticize her candidate - that she can somehow prevent that. The photo is already associated with her candidate's campaign. It's similar to how we can criticize an article (and accompanying photos) we disagree with.

This is what fair use is all about. It's what free speech is about. It's what America's about.

"It's what America's about" sounds corny to our poisoned minds, but it's a protection we should all applaud and defend.

@DStudio - you realize, it's the OTHER party she licensed the photo to, not the one she sued here? Did you really manage to miss that, or are you just flat out lying?

Link | Posted on Mar 21, 2019 at 03:08 UTC

"According to the results, more than 8 in 10 images taken by non-professionals fell into the "Informational" category, which is described as photos that provide info but lack emotion and creativity. In comparison, 49% of professional news images fell into the Informational category."

How exactly is it a bad thing, then, to be "informational"?

In my reading, the above says, 80% of the non-professional images appeared objective, whereas 51% of the professional images were trying to manipulate the viewer's perception with emotion.

Link | Posted on Jan 3, 2019 at 03:21 UTC as 104th comment | 6 replies
Total: 60, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »