An anonymous reader sends a story from a writer whose Facebook account was locked because somebody reported it as using a pseudonym. It doesn’t, but Facebook demands a look at identification documents before releasing control over the account. Anyone whose name doesn’t sound “real” to Facebook is at risk for this, and the social network doesn’t even have a consistent stance on what an “authentic” name is. “Aside from the complexity of identity, the policy is haphazardly enforced at best. At worst, it’s dangerous and discriminatory, and has demonstrably and repeatedly been used to target people who often already are marginalized and vulnerable.” Matt Cagle, attorney for the ACLU, says, “By controlling the identity of the speaker with this policy, Facebook has the effect of both reducing speech and eliminating speakers from the platform altogether. This is a particularly concerning move to the ACLU because forums like Facebook serve as the modern-day equivalent of the public square for a lot of communities. Read more of this story at Slashdot.
Excerpt from:
Facebook’s Absurd Pseudonym Purgatory
Researchers in fields from epidemiology to genetics are studying mummies, using the latest imaging technology. Now we know more than ever before about what lies beneath the mummies’ wrappings — and these long-dead people are telling us a lot about ancient lives and cultures. Read more… 
It’s been 7 years, and the great iOS vs Android debate rumbles on—in internet forums and real life. But these platforms have come a long way even in the last year or two. Do the old arguments still apply? What features separate iOS 8.3 from Android 5.1 Lollipop? We used a Nexus 6 and an iPhone 6 to investigate. Read more… 
3D printing has just reached another major milestone as the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration has officially approved GE’s T25 as the first 3D printed part cleared for use on a commercial jet engine . Read more… 
In 1815 William Smith drew a map of the United Kingdom which transformed the scientific landscape: It laid the foundations for modern geology, and identified natural resources which would beget the Industrial Revolution. But up until last year, this first-edition copy was considered to be lost forever. Read more… 
We all know the motion picture is a lie. That movement on screen? It’s just a bunch of still images. Still images that seem more like believable, realistic, lifelike motion the faster they flicker along. Faster is better, and that 48 frame-per-second version of The Hobbit was just the beginning. Read more… 
jones_supa writes: It should be safe to conclude that humans can see frame rates greater than 24 fps. The next question is: why do movies at 48 fps look “video-y, ” and why do movies at 24 fps look “dreamy” and “cinematic.” Why are games more realistic at 60 fps than 30 fps? Simon Cooke from Microsoft (Xbox) Advanced Technology Group has an interesting theory to explain this all. Your eyes oscillate a tiny amount, ranging from 70 to 103 Hz (on average 83.68 Hz). So here’s the hypothesis: The ocular microtremors wiggle the retina, allowing it to sample at approximately 2x the resolution of the sensors. Showing someone pictures that vary at less than half the rate of the oscillation means we’re no longer receiving a signal that changes fast enough to allow the supersampling operation to happen. So we’re throwing away a lot of perceived-motion data, and a lot of detail as well. Some of the detail can be restored with temporal antialiasing and simulating real noise, but ideally Cooke suggests going with a high enough frame rate (over 43 fps) and if possible, a high resolution. Read more of this story at Slashdot. 
What does the Navy do when it needs to know for sure that a new weapon system or electronic countermeasure works, not just under stringent lab-like settings or at a land based range, but in its intended operating environment? They put it to sea on a giant remote controlled Destroyer and throw live missiles at it. Read more… 