Search Electronic signature Form Simple

I now accept Suggested Edits, as they come in. Include the price of the product/service.Pre Launch:Javelin. Start and grow your product faster. javelin.com/?ref=p5eybNFKResearch:Clipular http://www.clipular.com (free)Evernote http://www.evernote.com. Free, and $45 per year.Launching Soon Page:LaunchRock http://www.launchrock.comLaunchSoon http://launchsoon.comLanding PagesSelf Hosted:ThemeForest http://www.themeforest.net $8+Hosted:UnBounce (landing pages) http://www.unbounce.com $50/moKickOffLabs: http://www.kickofflabs.com/ $15/monthOptimizely: https://www.optimizely.com/ $17/monthTurnkey...

So, How Do We Future-Proof Our Jobs?I’m not saying these jobs are going to be obsolete. I’m saying that if these things take you 40 hours a week to do, soon it will be three hours a week, so you are not going to be able to rely on that type of work to keep you busy. Machines are going to do a worse job than humans at things like drafting a cross-examination outline, not because it’s complex, but because a cross-exam is not just about the “what” you deliver, it’s about the “how.” So, you can have a very fact-based cross exam, but you are not going to persuade anyone with it if it’s not delivered properly. Machines might be able to help suggest better interrogatories for us, but responding and applying the proper objections, or even more importantly, knowing which battles to fight, that’s going to be a decision made by humans for a long time.So, the bottom line is that a lot of analysis and fact-finding will be done by machines, but the application is going to be done by humans. If you had dreams of being a traffic ticket lawyer one day, there’s still going to be that job in five or ten years, but a lot of that work is going to be taken up by machines.Lawyers can sometimes be behind the curve when it comes to technology adoption, so it’s not uncommon that our clients will be using things like OCR of documents and cloud storage and efax and electronic signatures before we do. Then, the questions come from the client of, “Why did you charge me a 2.8 for reviewing and analyzing the records to find Mr. X’s name if you could have OCR’ed it and run a text search? I’m marking that down to a 0.3.”That’s not the scary thing, though. The scary thing is when clients say, “Why should I even pay you a 0.3 when I have an app that will draft my contract/will/purchase agreement/etc. for a $4.99 one-time purchase.” Now, if you’re reading this, you are probably a lawyer or a law student and you are immediately thinking of 100 reasons why your ability to pick the right form for your clients or pull templates of old contracts you’ve drafted and Frankenstein together a new document with some client-specific tweaks is better than anything a robot could do. Most of you are probably right. For now.What are you going to do in seven to ten years when that is not true? From what I’ve seen, it’s coming. There is so much machine learning already going on in the background of so many popular apps that you use every day — you’d be surprised. Last week at the signNow Max conference, we saw a preview of some of the machine-learning tools coming out over the next year, and it’s mindblowing what analytical tasks computers can already do. The truth is that some services are not meant to be billed out at $350 an hour, and if you perform a type of service that can be done by a machine, you will be obsolete.I’ve previously written about how robots are not going to take over our jobs, and I stand by that analysis. That article ran on June 21, 2016, and less than a week later, one of the hottest trending topics on social media was a chatbot app that beat 160,000 traffic tickets. So, the truth is that robots are not coming to take our jobs, they are coming to revolutionize our jobs, and we can either get on board or become less relevant. There are certain aspects of legal work that robots will be great at (or are great at, if you are a traffic ticket robot). With other aspects of the legal profession, humans will have a monopoly for a little while longer.Things That Robots Will Do Better Than Humans In Five YearsI think technology is going to replace legal research jobs. Not entirely, but it’s going to make the job so much easier that legal research will take a fraction of what it does now. We watch a video in one of my classes that I teach from 20 or 30 years ago of an associate who is researching an appellate brief and spends all night Shepardizing a case. Now, of course, we do this with a few mouse clicks. In ten years, law students will watch videos of how we did legal research back in 2016, and they will laugh.A few weeks ago at the Academy for Private Practice in Philadelphia, we saw a new tool from Casetext that lets you drag and drop a brief into your browser window, and it will analyze the legal authorities you cite and let you know which cases and which statutes you are missing. Legal research is pretty mechanical. We already have tools in the ediscovery world that can tell you with fair accuracy whether one document out of a million is a hot document or an irrelevant document by reading a seed set of documents and “learning” what is important, and then instantly analyzing the rest of the documents to see if it can find anything relevant. What happens when we apply that to legal research, searching across millions of authorities, instead of millions of emails?Other jobs, such as form-heavy jobs, and jobs that rely on using templates or recycling old language from other cases, are going to be less relevant as well. That’s how that chatbot beat all of those traffic tickets – by running through a simple questionnaire, and then mechanically applying the laws to facts.

Great question!There are several ways that you can promote your website. Here are a few of my favorites:Schedule social media posts (blog articles, quotes, bit size content from your website) via Hootsuite to post on multiple channels such to get maximum signNow.Channels such as Facebook, Instagram, LinkedIn, TwitterLook up hashtags specific to your business on Twitter and engage with others or even better yet provide them a free resource that you’re giving away (preferably one that leads back to your site).Engage with people on Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, and Instagram by asking questions, answering questions, and starting new conversations.Pin new content on Pinterest a couple of times a week.There are many ways you can promote your website and it’s hard to not to get overwhelmed–so pick a few and give them a try. Once you’re ready you can always do more to promote.

First things first, from all the tools I use, I’m listing a few that save me an immense amount of time. Thus helping me focus on things that matter. Here goes my list:Pocket - A handy tool to save useful links. After a while, my bookmarks are just unorganised and Pocket made it simple to save links. I could save everything in one place and hence retrieval is easy. Also, If I ever come across something during work that might be a distraction, I Pocket it and read it later.Buffer - Primarily I use this to manage posts and content from our SM handles. I schedule posts at one time and never have to look at it again. This saves a lot of time as I can dedicatedly work on the content and push them to the pipeline.LearnBee - (Disclaimer: my team built it and I use it every day). I use it to find a specific work file quickly or to attach multiple work files in an email or to search for a file to show to the team during a meeting. The Chrome extension just saves me an immense amount of time, which I otherwise waste searching for a file.Jira and Trello - Both of these tools help me individually as well as my team to prioritize, organise and complete tasks in a better and efficient way.

Have you actually searched Google for something like “south african inventions” or similar search terms? I did one search and found this Wikipedia page right away:List of South African inventions and discoveries - WikipediaI’m quite sure if you did a few more searches, you’d have more inventions to add to that list.Off you go!To make sure I answer the question, here are those listed on Wikipedia’s page:18th Century[edit]1743 - Jukskei - is a folksport originating from the Cape and is thought to be the forerunner of the American game Horseshoes.pre-1772 - Rooibos tea - the Khoisan of the Cederberg region made the tea for hundreds of years and later in 1772; naturalist Carl Thunberg noted, "the country people made tea" from a plant related to rooibos or redbush which reignited interest in the tea.[1]19th Century[edit]1787-1828 - Iklwa - this new shorter form of the Assegai was popularized under the rule of Shaka Zulu.20th Century[edit]1900-1930[edit]Dolosse - Cape Town, South Africa1925 Pinotage is South Africas signature variety wine grape and was bred from a cross between Pinot noir and Cinsaut grapes.1930-1960[edit]1940's Wadley Loop the circuit was designed by Dr. Trevor Wadley and was first used for a stable Wavemeter.[2]1950 Sasol world's first oil-from-gas company and the country's largest fuel producer.1950 Q20 lubricant Invented in 1950 by Mr. Robertson in Pinetown,[2] Q20 is an all purpose lubricating spray that is owned by the Triton-Leo Group (Pty) Ltd.[3] The name derives from "it has 20 answers to 20 questions".1957 Flame ionization detector by Harley and Pretorius at the University of Pretoria in Pretoria, South Africa1959 Tellurometer was the first successful microwave electronic distance measurement equipment and was also invented by Dr. Trevor Wadley.1960's Helikon vortex separation processis an aerodynamic uranium enrichment process designed around a device called a vortex tube.The Uranium Enrichment Corporation of South Africa, Ltd. (UCOR) developed the process, operating a facility at Pelindaba near Pretoria.1960's Pratley's PuttyThe prototype CT scanner1960-1980[edit]1963 CT scan or the CAT scan was invented by Allan MacLeod Cormack and it won him the 1979 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine (along with Godfrey Hounsfield) for his work on X-ray computed tomography (CT).[2]1963 Dolos is a concrete block in a complex geometric shape weighing up to 20 tons, used in great numbers to protect harbour walls from the erosive force of ocean waves.1965 Retinal cryoprobe; Selig Percy Amoils refined the cryoextraction method of cataract surgery by developing a cryoprobe that was cooled through the Joule-Thomson effect of gas expansion.1965 - Vuvuzela - Freddie "Saddam" Maake claimed the invention of the vuvuzela by fabricating an aluminium version in 1965 from a bicycle horn.Retinal Cryosurgery • While working at Soweto's Baragwanath Hospital in 1965, South Africa's Dr Selig Percy Amoils unveiled the Amoils Cryo Pencil, which is the world's first surgical tool that uses extreme cold (nitrous oxide) to destroy unwanted tissue. Dr Amoils' pencil has made retinal detachment surgery and cataract extraction simple and safe - it has been used to treat Margaret Thatcher and Nelson Mandela's eyes. His invention has transformed cryosurgery (the use of extreme cold produced by liquid nitrogen) for gynaecology, lung, heart, mouth, liver and prostate surgery.1967 Heart transplantation; Dr. Christiaan Barnard completed the world's first successful heart transplantation on 3 December 1967 in Cape Town.[2]• Pratley’s Putty, George Pratley invented Pratley’s Putty while trying to create a glue that would hold components in an electrical box. Pratley’s Glue had a part in the success of the Moon Landing. In 1969 the substance was used to hold bits of the Apollo XI mission’s Eagle landing craft together.1970 Diamond vitrectomy cutter was also invented by Selig Percy Amoils1971 PayPal, co-founder Elon Musk was born in Pretoria.1970's Scheffel bogie, Dr Herbert Scheffel designed a new type of Bogie in order to increase the development of South Africa's narrow gauge railway system. His new design went on to help set the world rail speed record of 245 kilometres per hour.[4]1970's Computerized ticketing; Percy Tucker of Benoni founded Computicket the world's first computerized ticketing system which went national in 1971.[5]1974 Kreepy Krauly invented by Ferdinand Chauvier, formerly from the Belgian Congo.[6]1980-2000[edit]1980 Casspir; Unique design for military personnel carrier in relation to landmines.The main armoured steel body of the vehicle is raised high above the ground, so when a mine is detonated, the explosion is less likely to damage the crew compartment and kill the occupants. The cross-section of the hull is V-shaped, directing the force of the explosion outwards, further protecting the occupants.1984 - Denel Rooivalk - the first military attack helicopter developed that is capable of making a 360 degree loop, a feat previously seen as impossible.1989 Flightscope invented by Henri Johnson [7] it is a radar system used by professional golfers for analysing recorde trajectory, their launch angle, speed and direction.1991 APS Therapy invented by Gervan Lubbeit is used to treat sports injuries and provides relief from chronic pain conditions.[8][9]1992 Speed Gun[2] is a device that measures the speed of cricket balls; invented by Henri Johnson[10] from Somerset West and used in the 1999 Cricket World Cup.[8] Johnson also invented the Speedball (invention)[8] that measures the speed and angle of objects especially cricket and tennis balls and is used in various sporting tournaments.[8]1995 Shark Shield a portable electronic device that emits an electromagnetic field and is used by scuba divers, spearfishing, ocean kayak fishing and surfers to repel sharks.1995 Thawte Consulting is a certificate authority (CA) for X.509 certificates. Thawte was founded by Mark Shuttleworth.1996 - Prepay Mobile Phone - Vodacom became the first network to introduce prepay mobile, under the 'Vodago' package, using an 'Intelligent Network' platform. This made it possible to debit customers’ accounts in real time,[11] and led to a dramatic increase in uptake.[12]1997 CyberTracker a piece of software from a CyberTracker Conservation, that develops handheld data capture solutions for illeterate animal trackers.1997 Hippo water roller: a device for carrying water more easily and efficiently than traditional methods, particularly in the developing world. It consists of a barrel-shaped container which holds the water and can roll along the ground, and a handle attached to the axis of the barrel.1998 Blaster (flamethrower), Charl Fourie designed the flamethrower to provide a defence against carjackings.1999 Smartlock Safety syringe, a three part single use syringe credited with dramatically reducing HIV infection rates in South Africa.[13]21st Century[edit]2001 Cobb grill. Ken Hall based his design on the paraffin stove in many rural areas of South Africa, the grill was featured in the TIME magazines best inventions of the year for 2001.[14]2001 Oil-Can Guitar made by engineer Graeme Wells in Cape Town.[5]2004 Ubuntu (operating system) was invented by entrepreneur Mark Shuttleworth and runs on the Linux system.2008 Freeplay foetal heart rate monitor, a power-free foetal heart monitor.[15][16]

If the Marvel Universe were anything like the real Universe, it shouldn’t be too hard to hide six objects I can fit inside a jewelry box.There are estimated to be two trillion galaxies and 700 sextillion (7 followed by 21 zeros) stars spread across the Universe. But because this is comics, there are always ways around searching every star system individually for the electron, in the atom, in the needle, on the planet, in the star system, across the sea of stars.Up to now, astronomers usually said we know of about 200 billion galaxies in the observable universe (meaning out to our event horizon, a look-back time of 13.8 billion years). Now the number can be said to be about 2 trillion, with the caveat that this estimate doesn't go back a full 13.8 billion years, it's 600 million years short. (Not many galaxies could have formed before then.) The only reason the number is 10 times bigger now is that you can legitimately include more of those littlest early building blocks; they're no longer so theoretical. The total amount of stuff — stars and gas — hasn't changed.So no, we do not "also have to update the number of stars in the observable universe, which now numbers around 700 sextillion," as some uninformed science writers are saying. That's what they get for taking press-release hype literally.About Those 2 Trillion New Galaxies . . . - Sky & TelescopeAlas, there are always ways around searching through individual stars, one a a time, until the heat death of the Universe. Seriously. If Thanos were able to be in ten places at the same time, every second, it would take him longer than the Universe has lived to date, far longer.Comics on the other hand always offer a means around such wearisome star searching, claiming there are always affinities, relationships, hidden mysterious knowledge being tracked and understood by forces beyond Human understanding.Introducing Death’s Infinity Well whose first appearance was in The Thanos Quest (1990):Recently resurrected by Death in order to wipe out half of the population of the universe, the Titan Thanos discovers the true nature of the six Infinity Gems after gazing into Death's Infinity Well. Convincing Death that possession of the gems will aid him tremendously in his quest, he gains her permission to seek them out from the cosmic entities that currently possess them.Now that you know how Thanos found them the first time, you understand there is no place in the Universe where Death has no sway and her Infinity Well would be unable to find the Gems.With that said: I consider myself a clever fellow and think I could place them in a couple of places where they would be both difficult to find and difficult to retrieve…Hide it in a singularity’s event horizon:The first best place would be to find a super-massive black hole at the center of a galaxy and set them on an orbit, inside the event horizon.This would place them in a stable but unsignNowable orbit inside the event horizon, in a slowly decaying orbit, forever. Since they can’t be destroyed they would simply be beyond anyone’s signNow, forever.Okay, maybe a Cosmic or Abstract Being may be able to circumvent this, but only the best or weirdest is likely to try. It should be well below even the super-intelligent machinations we associate with the Mad Titan.There are at least two trillion supermassive singularities in the Universe. Finding it would be difficult, retrieving it should be next to impossible.Hide them in a star:Let’s face it, there are an estimated 700 sextillion stars in the known Universe. I can see hiding it there for a number of reasons.The gems would not be affected by the environment. However, almost anything that lives in our universe would find the environment at the center of a star to be a challenging place to exist.The star’s energy output should mask the gem’s signature, and if you placed it in the right kind of star, it could remain hidden and inaccessible for billions of year.If you hid it in a young super-massive star whose death might occur in 500 million years or less, it would be an even more inhospitable environment and when the star dies a supernova would blast the Infinity Gems in a random direction providing some of the greatest energy output in the Universe as cover while the gems are lost in a random direction, becoming even harder to find.See: Would launching the Hulk into the Sun kill him?Here’s a place most people wouldn’t think of: A cosmic voidIn the darkest regions of space between galaxies, where nary an atom exists to break the monotony for light years, lie vast, dark, voids, hundreds of millions of light years across. No. I am not making this up.Cosmic voids are vast spaces between filaments (the largest-scale structures in the Universe), which contain very few or no galaxies. Voids typically have a diameter of 10 to 100 megaparsecs; particularly large voids, defined by the absence of rich superclusters, are sometimes called supervoids.They have less than one-tenth of the average density of matter abundance that is considered typical for the observable Universe. They were first discovered in 1978 in a pioneering study by Stephen Gregory and Laird A. Thompson at the Kitt Peak National Observatory.Voids are believed to have been formed by baryon acoustic oscillations in the Big Bang, collapses of mass followed by implosions of the compressed baryonic matter.Starting from initially small anisotropies from quantum fluctuations in the early Universe, the anisotropies grew larger in scale over time. Regions of higher density collapsed more rapidly under gravity, eventually resulting in the large-scale, foam-like structure or “cosmic web” of voids and galaxy filaments seen today. Voids located in high-density environments are smaller than voids situated in low-density spaces of the universe.What’s worst than searching a galaxy for a needle in a haystack? Searching nothing which spans on for millions of light years in every direction. A sea of nothingness which would challenge even the patience of an immortal to search through a Universe filled with these open spaces where even atoms can’t be found.With no life forms around, and having never been around, the possibility of anyone stumbling across the gems for Death’s Infinity Well to see them should be minimized.Technically, there is no place in the Universe where they could be perfectly hidden unless the last person who used the Infinity Gauntlet was truly clever.The solution would simply be to exile the gems to the beginning of our Universe, move them through time to the Big Bang and let them be at the expansion of the Universe.There would be no way to track them and their interaction with the Universe would be such they would always remain out of the signNow anyone but the most sophisticated and capable species. Species smart enough to know not to try and use them.You want to make it really hard, you keep them out of temporal sync with the rest of the Universe, available but just out of signNow because you need the ability to manipulate time to signNow them.Granted, this wouldn’t stop Thanos, who using technology, CAN, manipulate the flow of time, but normal people won’t ever be able to see, sense or be aware of them, otherwise.The Infinity Gems exist because the One-Above-All wants them to be found and used. It’s that simple, so if he/she/it/they want them found, they will be no matter where I think to put them.Speculation on the Infinity Stones:Who’s more powerful: Thanos with Infinity Gauntlet or The-One-Above-All?Can there be any scientific explanation for the “Infinity Stones”?Would you rather have a Mother Box or an Infinity Stone, and why?Do super powers (in the MU) ultimately derive from the Infinity Stones?What is more powerful: The Infinity Gauntlet or the Heart of the Universe? What does each do?

The Chinese DF-21D Anti-Ship Ballistic Missile is currently the only Medium-Range Ballistic Missile capable of attacking ships at sea…supposedly. This has yet to be convincingly demonstrated, even under test conditions.We’ll skip over the fact that this is an MRBM, as opposed to an ICBM, for the moment. Though one could suppose that if you can do this with an MRBM, it is theoretically possible to do it with an ICBM.There are five key problems with making this concept work. (And, by the way, the all get worse when dealing with the range and velocity implied by an ICBM…)First, you have to find the target and fix its location throughout the progress of the attack.Second, you have to have a workable homing system to guide the weapon to the target.Third, you have to be able to maneuver the missile sufficiently to correct for targeting errors.Fourth, you have to be able to defeat enemy defenses.And fifth, you have to have a warhead that can defeat the target.We’ll attack each problem, in turn.1. Finding the target is no simple task, particularly given the range implied by an MRBM — up to 800 nautical miles, in this case. That’s a good 1 million nm2 (assuming only half of the circle is the search area — you’re unlikely to be interested in shooting your ASBM at ashore targets…) That’s an enormous amount of water to search, and your target is going to be moving.There are a few ways to attack this problem, including collection of target electromagnetic signals, acoustic detection, radar satellites, etc., but before you can fire, you’re going to eventually have to have something much tighter and discriminate to put a hole in what you’re trying to hit. Signals intelligence can be defeated by refusing to emit EM signals — and is not likely to give you sufficient enough accuracy for targeting, anyway. Acoustic tracking over these distances is iffy at best, and also subject to spoofing. Satellite radar can be jammed or decoyed.No, to do this job, you’re going to require some form of eyes on target, with secure comms back to the launcher. This is usually done with long-range aircraft or submarines. Both can be countered, and both have rather tenuous links back to the launcher. But hey, if you’re going to risk these platforms to spot for the ASBM, why not just arm them and be done with it?2. Putting a workable homing system on a Medium Range Ballistic Missile is more problematic than it might at first seem. The missile will encounter enormous thermal and acceleration stress that would require a lot of special protection for the homing electronics. Not impossible, but definitely challenging.The first choice of a homing system would be radar, as it would have the widest field of view to overcome target position errors, and would probably be more resistant to the stresses listed above than optical sensors. However, radars — particularly those small enough to fit in the nose of a reentry vehicle (RV) — are vulnerable to jamming and spoofing. While the target is likely to have several minutes of warning to prepare, the RV will likely only have seconds to turn on, pick its target, and guide itself in. And the target’s jammers can be orders of magnitude more powerful than the RV’s radar. Also, escorting ships can carry countermeasures that make them appear to have the radar signature of the actual target (or even bigger), chaff clouds can be deployed, and the target itself could tow a sled with radar reflectors, etc., to make it a more attractive target than the ship, itself.Optical homing is even worse. Not only do the delicate electronics have to survive reentry stress, but some form of sensor window has to be created through the heat shield. This would probably consist of popping off a cover on the nose, but this is one more failure point for the system. If the cover fails on reentry, no sensor. If it fails to deploy, also no sensor. Further, the optical sensor would have to identify the intended target out of a group of possible candidates with a self-contained internal intelligence in a matter of seconds. Forget trying to put a man in the loop. That would be next to impossible, and jammable, in any event.Oh, and optical sensors are jammable, too. Particularly when the RV is flying a predictable ballistic path.3. Maneuvering the RV is no small feat. Minor corrections to overcome small targeting errors are definitely possible, but it adds complexity and further failure points to the system. However, maneuvering RVs are most often talked about in the context of foiling defense systems. The kind of maneuvers implied by this are probably incompatible with precision targeting. It is highly unlikely that a small RV can outmaneuver an intercepting missile and still hit a relatively small target that is, itself, maneuvering. And remember, with the velocity involved in returning from space, it would only have seconds to accomplish all this.Oh, yeah. And how does this RV know it’s under attack in the first place? Any additional equipment that solves this problem costs weight and volume and additional EM windows in the heat shield, things that can’t easily be afforded. You might just end up having to forego a warhead at all, and just end up shooting electronic boxes at your target.Ok, we’ll just make these maneuvers as a matter of course, whether or not the RV is being intercepted. If you do that, you’re going to have to maneuver in a predictable manner (making you easier to intercept), while greatly increasing your terminal homing problem, when you might not need to…4. Defensive countermeasures are truly problematic in this scenario. Anything heavy enough to simulate a real RV once it hits the atmosphere might just as well be another real RV. Forget jamming — weight, volume, EM windows in the heat shield, and a tiny amount of power. Almost certainly, the only viable defensive measure would be maneuvering…see above.5. I asked a friend of mine who is an authority on these problems. what kind of damage one could expect such an RV to cause to its target. After doing some calculations that revolved around Mass x Velocity squared, he figured that it would be the equivalent of a hit by a 2,000 pound aircraft bomb. Now, that could be fatal to a small ship, but I can’t think of any realistic scenario where that would sink an aircraft carrier. It could cause some serious damage if it hit the wrong things, but “Carrier Killer?” I think not. And that’s assuming you’ve successfully solved all the problems listed above.Ok, back to problem number 1. A lot of folks get all excited about Over-the-Horizon (OTH) targeting, but it’s a LOT harder than they make it out to be. In point of fact, except under highly controlled test conditions, I can’t think of a time when it has actually been done. Operational conditions in the real world tend to be messy, and that’s nearly insurmountable for OTH schemes.Our capstone exercise at Marine Corps Command & Staff College back in the late 1990s involved an amphibious landing on the coast of Iran to clean out antiship missiles threatening the Strait of Hormuz. I proposed that we NOT do the landing, as the problems facing the Iranians in employing their missiles OTH in those waters, and things we could do without having boots on the ground rendered them pretty much impotent. I graphically detailed all of the issues showing why this was the case. The faculty in charge of the exercise just looked at me and said, “You’re DOING THE LANDING!” and walked off. Oh, well…