Space Patroller

When this first came up on my radar, the reccommended minimum was 1.3 megapixels. I've seen on ebay factory refurbished units of 10 meg for about $US85 and was tempted but didn't know about the documentation, and some units going for $US500 and more. I figure 7 meg ought to be enough for more than I plan to do. The Polaroid i739 has 7 megapixels and 3 levels of image quality: Economy, Normal and Fine. Wiht an SD card of 2 GB you can hold 553 still images so I'm not going to spare the bytes there although the filesize is big. 2+ MB. I've used the Microsoft editor zoom in to as high as 200% and there was no image breakup that I could see. The unit also functions as a camcorder with, at 2 GB a time limit of what looks like 57 minutes, and a "PC camera" which I take to be a webcam I made my own website using Notepad. and the "headbump" method; learning the HTML by bumping my head on the ceiling of my knowledge and needing some more.

Before continuing. I must ecplain something. Most of the "dangerous" material in nuclear waste is not from power. Most of the radioactive material from nuclear power is (gasp!) recycledl. For spent rods, this is known as "reprocessing". That stuff is valuable and cheaper to extract from existing stock than to make new. Two thirds of our nuclear wastes come from medical uses. Petr Beckmann made this known over 20 years ago. This is where some of the moust radioactive and exotic materials, including highly toxic metals, are used on a large scale. Even anti-matter is used (I've had some of that in my body, too) The danger is what the eco's will do to the medical industry when they find this out. Will some future Obama be ready to "bankrupt the nuke med industry"? and what will THAT mean? The other radiation danger is in your own home. Most forms of masonry like plaster and sheetrock have miniscule amounts of U-235 in them as a naturally occuring substance. This is fissioning, The first product or "daughter element" of this process is radon, which is a gas and disperses into the air. The next daugter element is a radioactive mineral as are all the rest until it fissons into a non-radioactive mineral. In a house with small drafts like the pre 1975-built places. this was no problem. But then came "weatherization" at the behest of the Eco-Inquisition. This made the homes tightly (meterorologicall) sealed which did two things, made them burn better (ask a firefighter about what happens to weatherized homes). In c1983 REASON and Beckmann's ACCESS TO ENERGY exposed (pun intened) this weatherization as a nuclear threat. In an un-weatherized place. small drafts disperse the radion gas and it largely escapes via the cracks to cause no hamr. In the weatherized house. this is confined to the building where, over the years, it is breathed, gets into the lungs and fissions down into a sequence of radioactive mineral/metals and sits in the lungs doing its deadly thing. Beckmann did compute the amount of "cancer doses" that this would lead to and it was not trivial. And we thought the eco's were harmless nuts. To quotr Rand "Today's unchallenged slogans become tomorrows accepted virtues"

To the post prior to this one: I'd love to be abile to learn to use L-view Pro in a systmatic way. Soooo many gadgets! but the differening strengths of differeng programs is why I'm armed to the bicuspids. In addition to Auto-Corect. Microsoft Photo Editor does let you perfomr the operations individually, having Color: amount, hue and saturation. Brightness: brighness, contrast and mid-tones, as well as the usual Resize, crop and the like. But only Photo Explorer has Focus (sharpness). To me, many raw photos appear translucent until I kick up the brightness (adds opacity) and sharpness (edges seem to be a bit blurred) and often the contrast (for distinction). Whether that is real or just a function of my eye, I don't know, but I don't have that trouble with drann or photos on the Web. For myself, I'm interested in these kinds of things to make the images look as true to life as I can. There are two difinitions of "art" to whcih Rand ascribed. 1) The Classical arts. music, literature, painting/scupture/archetecture and the stage 2) Implementation in an integrated, systematic fashion. such as the 'art of medicine" as differentiated from teh science of medicine. Music Engineering (mixing, effects etc in such a way that it validates a sense of life. In '93 I composed, played and recored an album called DEADLY FARCE on an X-15 4-track that often used more than four instruments. Wish I had that back. its only flaw was that when you hit Pause there was a click I do have a Port-a-Studio 03 somewhere that I should break out and fire up. Yes, I;m a rock and roller I alos have Audcity and KRISTAL which I really ought to get to work on but I need samples and a controller Kb and tofind the midiport if this puter has one or get a MIDI-USP interface [63 years old and I;m still ready, willing and able to hit the strings and tickle the "ivories"] and things like that) and the like. More recent is sound synthesis; both in imation of acoustic instruments such as string ensembles, wind and brass ensemobles and creation of whole new sounds (and with instruments like the SQ-80 digital-analog synthesizer. WOW!). I favor the view that there are "quasi-arts" like "abstract" or "non-representative" visuals which have some, but not all of the aspects of full art. Perhaps these may be thought of more as Design "etudes" more than art. 40 years ago I did an "abstract" that used light and dark paired and image sizes that were larger on the outside than towards the center (all the images were triangles) that gave a sense that the thing was either expanding or contracting, sometimes sequentially; sometimes alternativley. That thing would hold your attention for sometimes 5 or more minutes. That was a trip. Even so, my "abstracts" were known for their clarity of shape and color and dictinct edges, where most "abstracts" tended to be dreamy or indistinct". When I ran the lightshow for Resurrection. I used three concepts. pairing colors, having upped the range from the traditional red, yello and blue to full spectrum, placemtn of light source to use light, shadow and complementarity to induce "animation" and rhythm: "playinn" the controls (of which I had 7; red, orange, yellow, blue, green, purlple and the strobe) like an instrument, following either the bass or drums. These made the visual aspect match the movement of the music rather than being just added on or even a distraction (I told you I was a psychedelic "Take the trip without having to drop the acid"). I think phtography can fall into that when you start to do things like composition.

The snot-nosed twits at the EU and England are giving us crap about Gitmo. Now I have my disagreements with that policy but they center around determining the gulty from the innocent (it being the case that many of them were handed to us by The Northern Alliance and we have no real knowledge of what they may or may not have done or if the NA is just using us to settle their own busienss). But the EU/Brits are just being sanctimonious fairyhoppers. if Obama was a real man, he'd say to them "OK boys, let's see who's just running his mouth. I'll make you a deal. We'll close Gitmo if you'll take the inmates" Then watch the little weenies squeal like stuck pigs after which a man would say. "If you won't back it; don't yak it" and if they do take them well, one less problem for us and hopefully they'll get what they so richly deserve for demonstrating a lack of the front of the horse. Of course we tell them up front that if they let them go back into the wild, we'll be sore tempted to plant some mushrooms in their capital cities, just to keep it on the up and up. Ya think? Nah.

This is what I've been able to do with some of my stiff http://mediazilla.spacepatrol.us/2ive_been_framed.jpg With Microsoft Phto Editor Auto Correct The next two were with Phto Explorer Image Editor Cntrast & Brightness 1. Auto http://mediazilla.spacepatrol.us/3ive_been_framed.jpg 2. Cusom. more to my liking but maybe just a bit extreme for others. (I'd like feedback on this so I can cakibrate my eyesight relative to others) http://mediazilla.spacepatrol.us/4ive_been_framed.jpg

the co-mingling of chruch and state http://www.epa.gov/ I understand from radio ads that they've adopted the eco-wingnots' leaf as a symbpl Gallileo's need not apply

I put it here as I found it http://hatteraslight.com/navy/Objectivismh...akespeare1.html

Just to detour from the main topic slightly. here is my "Planet MP3" page. http://www.spaceojuke.spacepatrol.us/planetmp3.html This gets you everything I have to capture, post-produce and convert existing files you may have to MP3's Also there are some file downloads. By the end of the summer, I am planning to have them replaced by evenly bitrated mp3 files with ID3 tags that work in Properties. They are grouped in banks of 16 for conversion to CD files that will fit on one disk. I will do the same with the replacement and all downloads of files. For pop music an mp3 bitrate of 128kps is perfectly adequate Now I'm having ambitions of conquering the Video world. My i739m has a "movie mode" whicn with a 2GB card can record about 57 minutes of AVI vid. Oh well: Who is John Galt?

I see what you mean. I grabbed it up and tried to work on it with Photo Explorer Focus and Microsoft Photo Editor Auto Correct and got nowhere. Well now you know why I have an arsenal.

It turns out that the version of L-view that I have is the Pro. I also have provisions for integrating other image editors into Photo Explorer

This is what I heard: "We must do something about gaz guzzlers", "We must do something about pollution". "The government to the rescue!" This is what happened The auto industry nearly went down the tubes What timeframe am I talking about 1975-80 or 2006-09 I used to hear old-timers say "What this country needs is a good depression" I said 33 years ago "What this country needs is a good hard dictatorship. One that they'll never forget" It seems we've forgotten the lessons of the Depression and have spent like drunken sailors for the last 20 years. Just look at the amount of debt both public and private. Does "debt culture" do it for you Well maybe the good hard dictatorship will teach the country that when they hear the word, "eco" or "Environmental (ism, ist)", they'll hear "Mankind sacrified to the god of the tent caterpillar" or "Those nubjobs: Remember when we almost went broke on Cap and Trade and the solar and wind power stuff nearly put us in the poorhouse? F that bunch!" When they hear the term "Government financial regulation" they'll thihnk "27% inflation" and "My 402K just shrunk to a 100.6F" When they hear the words "Government oversight" they'll think "BullSHIT! Never again!" In fact maybe when they hear "Government ought t..." they'll get a rag and stuff it in the mouth of the speaker. If the Jews can remember the Egyptian oppression for 3,000 years, why can't Americans remember the 1970's for a miserable 30?!

My problem with L-view is that the I've got my widnow BG color to black and my text to whitebut they show up in the L-view as black on black Ulead Photo Explorer has something that the others don't. Focus, which is an edge softener/sharpener. Microsoft Photo Editor has Auto-Correct which ligtens and sharpens, but also changes the color (guess it never heard of 32 but True Color) sometimes. I use 20/20 to change image format I inherited may of them in the system and used them for drawing. Phot Express is for projects. For at least a couple of years I've wnated to do a Space Patrol calender. I can capture images from the show. If I can get a dozen and decent calendar software, I could do this. Maybe 2010 will be the year . Widnows has a calendar wizard with which I experimented by the results weren't that good or I didn't know what I was doing. I want it to be printer-friendly I just initialized my Adobe ImageReady and Photoshop. It seems like I'm armed to the teeth but have very little idea of what I'm doing. I got Irfanview because I needed something to make icons. Back when I had Windows 95, I had their photo editor. I would often find images at the sites I visited and could use it to improve the clarity and color and many of the people whose pix they were liked the job and would have me retouch their other pix. The biggest problem I find is the brightness tended bunch up around the center. I've heard of the blind leading the blind; but the sighted!? Wuzzup with that? If you work with gif's here's my favorite site for that. It's the only way that I can make transparent BG's http://gifworks.com These days, gif's have gotten so good that I can't tell them from jpeg's and tif's. ONe time, gif's used to suffer a horrnedous color . I converted a few once back about 8 years ago to see what the differences were. I see I've created a monster

Actually I have about 5 photo editors and viewers. Ulead Photo Explorer and Photo Express, Microsoft Phto Editor, Irfanview, the limited edtion of ByLight 20/20 and L-View. the last has so many functions I don't know where to begin. It may be that digital photography, images and grahics could use it's on forum in Productivity. For instance, what's the difference between raster and vector graphics, etc... There's a gazillion image filetypes. Each must be good for something. What I could use is a key to understanding theings like "gamma", "HSV", "Senh" , "mid-tones" and all of that and I'm talking from the ground up. Also what is "red eye" Could probably use tips on lighting, ISO, ESV and that kind of thing In other words, I'm a complete dope about this and need to know where I can find this out. If you're interested in audio, especially mp3, I can point you to some good stuff.

Thanx G and G I'm not ready to go THAT crazy yet. this is mostly for utilitarian purposes. Also, I have a place to put them if I need to . My domain has 30 GB of space of which I've used a grand total of 5 and may go up to 6 and 600 GB of band of which I've never used as much as 4. I've given my USB devices girls' names. my camera is Dagny, my card reader is Dominique, my mp3 player is Kira and my Flash Drive is Gaea. That way I can say I have a girl in every port. Corner time?

That's me. Why this is noteworthy is that it is at the tender age of 63. What that is all about is that, given my physical condition, only the bareest minimum of attempts were made to train me in visual matters. Yet it was all around them. As early as age 4 I had a strong interest in flying things. At age 7 I found the motiviation to read, (did you really think that Dick and Jane or New Friends and Neighbors would cut it for me? No shot: it was COLLIERS' and LIFE magazines' articles on space travel that were the prime movers here). when in 1954, my class became aware of the Crayola 64 color set, I HAD to have it and I used to be able to draw pretty well. But then the concept "low vision" had not really come into its own and below a certain level, such persons were lumped in with "blind". Consequently I just wasn't trained in matters visual and am for the most part self-taught. I never regarded that as any great shakes since I was more interested in the things it got for me. It was only later that I realized the size of what I had done, compensating for a 90+% deficit to a point that I was in the middle level of reading skill in my Freshman year as measured by the Science Research Associates' reading skills program. Also I became a fair sandlot ballplayer, specifically football and basketball and a mediocre hitter in baseball with a strong and accurate throwing arm; if I could see it, I could hit it, all of which I enjoyed tremendously. In short, I became moderately competitive with full-sighted persons with my mental skills often giving me an edge or making me of greater usefulness. I was also a voracious reader. This exacted a price. having accpmplished this, I became willfull and headstrong and very intolerant of disrespect. One of those things I missed out on is taking pictures. by the time a boy in 1956 was 11, he had a Brownie Haskey camera and was able to use it. That was not the case for me. I didn't miss it since I was wrapped up in other thihngs. Over the last 20 years, I've had a mild interest in photography, as a means to an end rather than an art. However the plethora of cameras, films and other paraphenalia was daunting to me and it was questionable whether I could use the viewfinder. So it went un-acted upon. Well, just a few weeks abo I saw a Polaroid i739 on ebay for $US65.00 and said "If I'm to get it done, I must start somewhere". A digital camera would be perfect for me. No film to have to figure out, buy and run out of, so I can practice until the cows com home and the LCD is the viewfinder so I'm home free there: It's all good. so I grabbed it up and learned to use it. I still have some learning to do with regard to lighting and things but I think I can handle it. I've been like a kid in a candy store thereafter. Since I don't have to buy film for it I can just go crazy taking pictures and deleting them or putting them on the computer and learning to edit and retouch. The invention of a usable LCD had made the viewfinder obsolete and I can easily handle the 2.5" screen. This can also serve as a "PC camera" for video conferencing. Am I to presume that this means webcam? With voice IM, which I have enabled, this is the staple of sci-fi known as the videophone. To accomplish this, I need some kind of clip to attach this to my flat-screen monitor. Now for a kicker. In 1968 we had 3 things. the keypunch machine, the teletype and closed circuit television. I suggested the marriage of the three to make the input for the cardpuncher visiable to and editable by, the operator before the actual card punch was done. This would decrease spoilage due to typographical errors by a huge amount. I was considered a mad visionary. Well look at computers today. I am no longer considered a visionary. And just think of what the ubiquitousness of keyboards has done for the typographical error idnustyr.

I missed this post. Religion is not a clear falsehood in the sense that it is not understood to be a falsehood by most or even many persons. Subjective law is quite well understood to be wrong, even by those whose morality is based in religion. In ethics we discuss ad nauseum "vincible" versus "invincible" ignorance. Relative to reality, it is a mixed system, some good (the prescritption to honesty for example) and some bad (mysticism) such that the falsehoods get confustigated with the truths and many of the physically false things are true psychologically or "spiritually" as they say. http://cockpit.spacepatrol.us/09feb.html This is because religion is not a simple one-element proposition. It is a (very) complex system of propositions, some trur, some false. As Objectivism shows, even if the existence of God falls, physical and moral absolutism still stands. Theft is still wrong and Man still earns his bread by the sweat of his brow. However. Most religionists in the advanced areas of the world draw a dividing line between religion and science: "The Bible tells us how to go to heaven, not how the heavens go". Urban VIII's "Proof destroys faith" was a new idea that was not part of theology in the Middle Ages when they were seen as complementary and is part of the same complex as the "Divine Right of Kings" as centrality was becoming the main issue, both in politics and intellectual activities, fuelled by the Renaissance and the belief in universality of ideas and authorities. We do not allow persons who sechew medicine in favor of prayer to indulge in such backward practices with their children. Laws that forbid the spread of clearly defined falsehoods seem to me to be based in objectivity. Your observation was quite sharp in that it pointedly demonstrates how the contradictions of a mixed system come back to bite one. It also shows the real doctrine of relativism in action. "Relativism" and "situational ethics", contrary to the common usage, refer the ethical doctrine that covers what to do if you have to chose between or among alternatives in a situation where none of the realistic choices is really up to par, such as the Principle of Double Effects, Choose that which does the most good and the least harm, and how to figure it out. An underlying part of this problem has been that religion has tried to rely on philosophy to prove the existence of God. Most scientific "proof" looks to observation, hypothesis and testing to establish the truth of an idea. Philosphy is not about this kind of thing. it is about finding out how to think about establishing what is true or false. Beyond that. Rand clearly stated that one cannot "prove" the existence of anything, not even oneself. So until physically based Theology can be constructed, there is really no way to approach this subject in a fully rational way. Most of the arguments for the existence of God are negative in nature. the First Cause is based on "You can't have an infinite Regression", the Moral Argument holds that "Withoug God, there would be no reason for morality", The Argument from Sustanence is "without God as a supporting principle the Universe would not remain in existence" and the Argument from Design holds that "without God (to enforce the Lase of Identity) the universe would collapse into chaos: Dogs would have kittnes, sticks would turn into snakes, etc". In most cases, these rely on the fallacy of the Argument to Ignorance. shifting the burden of proof. Also, religionists have tolerated too much superstition that supported their postions among the common folk even though theologians have known better for centuries.

I am operating under the proviso that Intelligent Design is clearly false. Also that It is the successor to "Creation Science", a buzzword of the '80's which is clearly false and dishonest For my purposes. I do not regard, for "editorializing" the unproven as clearly false, mrely unproven. Most of us probably accept as quite likely, the hypothesis that there is intelligent life elsewhere in the universe, just on the basis of probability, Sagan did the cualculation on COSMOS. But for now, that hypotheses is unproven.

Absolutely, but we are not there yet (alas). Until that day, if there is a clear falsehood then it has to be met head on. If it is not a clear falsehood then it is a matter of opinion. Rand supported the US Space Program conditionally and was an attendee at the Apollo 11 launch. The First Amendment was meant as a bulwark for truth by aloowing freedom of conscience to protect against tyranny, not a shield for lies. Speaking out against known falsehoods is everyone's business, even more so for the government since, by Rand's argumentation, it's job is specifically to prohibit force or fraud. While the government is in the education business, where it ought not be, then it must do so. and Creationism used dishonest means. See the Reason article "Hominids Not Welcom" c1980. The Creationists deliberately misinterpreted a geological fault to "prove" their case. Beyond that, once something enters the arena that is rightfully the place of science then it is subject to the same rigor and criticism as any player in that arena and can have no special privileges conferred upon it by reaon of it's place of origin.

Awwww! we bwoke his widdwle bawoon: Poor baby! I keep telling you gues. we've been part of the Right for 35 years. in fact the first political group founded on Objectivism was called the New Righ Coalition in 1971 or 2 in the heart of enemy territory, the Peoples' Repubic of Massatwochitts. I had two of their buttons a fuscia on that said "Who is John Galt" and a yellow one that said "FIGHT FOR CAPITAL$M". I used to war them to college. while we may not share the specific beliefs of the conservatives, or what passes for conservatives, we've long since co-opted the attitudes and values: Purpose, productivity, achievement-orientedness. moral absolutism and unbashed pro-Amricanism. I think we ought to take the whole thing over before the libertarians and conservatives frig it up beyond all redeemabilty. If we did, it really would br right. Just to show how much this douchebag knows. Rand was not a "strident atheist" and has said as much. How strident an atheist can you be and have a philosophical crush on St Thomas Aquinas or say "If I were a religious person, I would say 'God Bless America'. I am saying it anyway"? Could you imagine Madalyn Murray O'Hare, who once described the persons of the Soviet Union as "happy atheists"? doing either of those? Read Raned's assessment of religion in RM. It is not one of hostility but of sympathy (in the real meaning of that word). And what's more Fantasy Island than a political group whose beliefs includes demons and angels? Or did I take a wrong turn at Alpha Centauri? Looks like it'll be the Elves and Hobbits to the rescue. Oh well, It's a good thing I still have that crush on Galdriel (beats the livin' crap out of having one on Nancy Pelosi). In fact Tolkien was a member of the Oxford English Dictionary Committee (or something like that) and a Thomist. which is the Catholic branch of the Aristotelian family of philosphy

Isn't "neutrality" in the issue of what is obvious crapola kind of a denial of the point of education? Taken to the point where everything ends up going, that would require "neutrality" in the issue of flat vs sphereical Earth, witch doctory vx medicine and collectivism vs capitlaism. Please not that those who call for "neutrality" of the first two are locked and loaded on the matter of the last. Who was it that said "Do not waste time analysing a folly. Ask what it accomplishes"? Whoever she was had a gift for the practical.

There may be more to what you say than you think. It appears that there are enough elements of repressive government in existence to constitue a threat of a tipping point. One of the things that prevents us from going into a totalitarian spiral is that they are dispersed. However that is small comfort. The same dispersal that prevents the thing from collapsing into totalitarianism also prevents these proto-totalitarian elements from being done away with. It may be necessary for one or a few persons to take over and obliterate these elements (EPA, ATF, the two DOE's and others). I don't see any other option nor will "letting sleeping dogs lie" do much good. For it's just a matter of time before one or a clique of bad guys get these elements under their control. Now there's a strange thought, a liberating dictatorship (since it would have all the powers and forms of a dictatorship).

Well, actually there is a grain of truth to what they have to say besides Objectivism beng #1. Specifically it concernes the Universal Civilization. I was there when we contacted them, or rather they contacted us some 35 years ago. It seems that their pre-contact team had developed an addiction to Rice Kirspies, Cheerios and Raisn Bran. Now they wanted a way to transport large amounts of this thoroughout the galaxies. Their emissaries said as much and they wanted to use for experimental purposes vehicles ranging in length between 20 and 40 feet and in width from 8 to 12 and I said "All we have in those sizes are junked Greyhounds, but I imagine that the engine compartments will not hold motors of the size you need" "That is no problem" I was told "The omnigalactic drive system is no bigger than a large V-8 engine" so the deal was done and it worked perfectly and they are transporting Cheerios, Kix and Rice Krispies all across the heavens to this dayl I asked the leader of these aliens back in '74 "What's in it for us?" to which he answered "You will appreciate this when you enter your Computer age" "What has intergalactic Greyonhunds toting Rice Krispies across all of spece to do wiht advanced computers?" I queried "It will be a valuable item" "Yeah: What?" "The Universal Cereal Bus".

Looking at the ethical status of the Obama administration, a string of tax cheats, ethical failurs and the wholesale granting of ethical waivers by the CONgress, I am reminded of the admonition "Be careful what you wish for, you just might get it" and another "The political jokes you tell today mingt just be elected tomorrow". It seems that this is just what they are doing: at lightspeed. This is why I wanted the Democats in power: So that people could get a good look at them and they could blow their load prematurely i.e. before their "ideas" could take hold with Americans (the election of the 'crats had little to do with ideas. The drivers here were fed-up-edness with Bush and the fact that Obama is very articulate and has star quality). Now if the GOP was smart.... Well I did say "IF" not "when" or "Now that", right? One would think that Obama was a Republican plant to permanently discredit the Democrats but for that to be true, the GOP would need to have a sound grasp of how principles work and then grow a pair. Another cute reversal. The Democrats, the home of Feminism are behaving like Testosterone-poison thugs and the Republcans are acting like perfect young ladies.

How it was done in 198 aka 5 BM* http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l5vvKS8611g *Before Moog

I wonder who'll get the job. I understand the top 2 candidates are Wesley Mouch and Chick Morrison. Cuffy Meigs was mentioned but was not available for comment. He was busy at, of all things, playing the xylophone.