Night vision goggles usually are very sensitive to visible light yeah. Im not sure on exactly how the optics work but some modern ones are set up more like vr. Some are also sensitive to near infra red, and some see entirely in infra red. The latter are thermal imaging. The longer the wavelength you go (the more red) the more difficult it is to create sensors that receive a good image. You can imagine that putting a thermal eye in a warm blooded animal might be a bit difficult because the eye itself will be emitting light that overpowers the scene.
That's a great example of indirect brand interaction and how various brands perform market research without involving grocers.
If they wanted a grocery store could just sell that data. Discount cards guarantee that a given shopper buys their merchandise instead of another brands. Your use of they is ambiguous in this context.
Larger stores, like say Walmart or albertsons, are far more likely to have direct deals with brands. Smaller stores often will with in particular local brands bit it depends on the specifics. Your run of the mill grocer, rarer and rarer these days, probably has very little direct interaction in the way you are suggesting. It's certainly not why stores reorganize, when that is demonstrably because that just boosts sales.
Go chat with managers who do procurement at a grocery store, this isn't secretive conspiracy stuff, it's all just out there.
In the context of this discussion, switching to trains isn't really going to address the idea of people raiding the cargo haulers, in whatever shape they're in.
I don't think this is likely to happen regardless. Occasionally trucks are raided, though it's rare in the us. More often in some places where there's a lot more instability. But I don't think the reason it's rare in general is 'because there's a human at the wheel', especially not the concern that they may be armed.
It could. Data caps often don't exist for big players, something individual consumers do have to deal with anymore. Net neutrality directly targets these kinds of disparities.
There's nothing really stopping people from doing that to human driven trucks either. Besides, if it's 'capacity to make the choice of running someone over' you're after, just have a dude at a control center watching ten different trucks with remote control overrides. Something arguably they would do regardless for many reasons.
I don't think the author genuinely believes literally all museums are like this, but I do agree that the harsh tone and finality of their claims might be a bit strong. When applied on target though, the article isn't wrong, I'd say it makes great points about say the met 'justice washing' so to speak.
Huh? There are colonialist museums all over especially Europe. The UK is notorious for this in particular, but also not unique. There are numerous museums in the us as well which do not fit into this generalization, so claiming that the author is simply speaking in a biased way due to their us-centrism doesn't actually make any sense as a rebuttal. I'd wager one could levy an identical tone of complaint of the American author wrote about Europe, except by just claiming they aren't speaking to the culture they are party to.
Put another way conventional cameras work with cumulative sensors (at least for this conversation we can say they do) which record the total quantity of photons and their intensity being received in each spot. The shutter is the process of closing off light input and recording the data from the sensor. Technically there's an upper limit to how much light cameras can take in, which they'd asymptotically approach I imagine.
Your eyes don't work the same way. Each photodetector cell will send a signal when it reacts with a photon of sufficient energy (wavelength, intensity will increase the probability of reaction if im not mistaken) and send that signal to your brain. There's a lot of other complicated stuff going on, but at the end of the day your photo receptor cells are only so sensitive, and if light is below the threshold that will activate them, you'll mostly just get signal noise. This is true of conventional cameras too, but they are generally just tuned for a different purpose.
Animals with good night vision have highly reflective membranes behind their photo receptors to increase the probability of a photon interacting with a photo receptor, and often have different tuning on their whole eye optical systems that make them more sensitive, but also more likely to burn. There are always tradeoffs.
Just taken at face value this claim is wrong. What you're thinking of is that you can often get military hardware in media, as in tanks, soldiers as extras, uniforms, 3d models of vehicles, etc. Directly from the military/dod. These are things which often cost millions of dollars, you can occasionally get them for free in your movie. The caveat is generally that then the dod is allowed to vet and veto scenes and uses, the expectation being that they can kick out anything that depicts the military in a bad lens, more or less.
That's essentially the opposite path Photoshop took and that's considered good for both. Anyway can attest, krita works great for everything I've every used Photoshop for.
Written content can contain pii, but it's rarer. Written content isn't, by default, pii, but if someone tells anything reasonably pii the entire text can be consisted pii even when anonymized.
Night vision goggles usually are very sensitive to visible light yeah. Im not sure on exactly how the optics work but some modern ones are set up more like vr. Some are also sensitive to near infra red, and some see entirely in infra red. The latter are thermal imaging. The longer the wavelength you go (the more red) the more difficult it is to create sensors that receive a good image. You can imagine that putting a thermal eye in a warm blooded animal might be a bit difficult because the eye itself will be emitting light that overpowers the scene.