Everyone's doing math like they'd keep this dome at roof temperature.
I think it's far more likely the insides would be more around 40-50 degrees. Somewhere above freezing (Which solves a whole host of problems related to water damage, and lets snow melt off the dome.), letting people walk around without their fingers falling off, but not actually 'You don't need to heat your house at all'.
It isn't a question as to which is 'more efficient', building or dome heating, because they would actually be working together.
More generally, in the US, the designation of all divisions of a state is defined by state law. (Often in their constitution.) Counties, cities, towns, boroughs, whatever.
As is how they become that thing, and what sort of government they have, etc.
The federal government really has no concept of 'city' or whatever, although I think the census bureau has invented a few purely for statistical grouping, and they will use state-level grouping also when talking about things. (But none of that really means anything, officially.)
Now, the feds do have a concept of 'urban' vs. 'rural', based on population density. Fun fact: New Jersey is officially 100% urban.
Uhhh...that's cheaper because it doesn't do what a roof does.
It doesn't insulate and it doesn't reflect the heat away from the house.
You essentially need an 'underroof' at that point, something on top of the ceiling that serves the purpose of the roof.
It is not cheaper than normal to build a house with a flat roof and then build a greenhouse on top of that roof, which is what you've actually suggested here.
And it's certainly not cheaper in any climate that would be described as 'tropical'.
Even with an older, fairly non-reflective roof, the heated up part is the 'outside' of the roof, whereas with a greenhouse, the heat would end up being on the 'underroof'. Even if you open the greenhouse totally to the outside air, it's still worse than a normal roof, which at least has an air buffer which it has to heat first. (And that itself can be vented.)
Such a greenhouse might make sense in cold climates where cooling is never an issue, although freezing and snow would present interesting problems...your roof would not heat up as quickly to melt the snow, hence removing some of the 'greenhouse effect' you're counting on to heat the house, and resulting in a freezing 'greenhouse'. (Which is hopefully insulated, via the underroof, from the actual house, or all the hot air ends up in there.) OTOH, you could hook up 'defrosters' like in cars and melt the snow from the inside.
I'm not sure what collecting roof runoff has to do with anything. Most traditional roofs have gutters, and, hence, could easily collect runoff if people wanted.
Um, if you're going to dramatically restructure houses to that extent, you might as well just build them underground, which will result in almost trivial heating costs, and the same with cooling.
And, um, you're wrong about how much fans you'd need. For example, you seem to think you'd need them inside a house, that central air would not do enough.
Which is just silly. If central air actual did leave dead pockets of air in a house, it'd be leaving them now (Considering the negligable effect wind has on sealed houses.), and you'd suffocate by walking though them.
You no more need fans everywhere than fishtanks need giant turbines moving oxygenated air around. No, you need something putting oxygen bubbles in at the bottom, and normal movement will stir things enough.
Now, it's possible that the amount of air you'd need to let in would reduce the gains from the dome to nothing, in which case it's pointless, but saying 'everyone would die' is just silly. We actually let people operate combustion engines in enclosed spaces currently, like in the chunnel.
It a) is limited to modem speed, aka, 56kps (Actually, a little lower, as cell phone have lossier encoding.), b) uses your minutes, and c) stops you from making or receiving calls.
It doesn't use 'data' at all.
Tethering is the phone NATing(1) the IP address it is given by the data part of the cell phone network, instead of posing as a 'modem' and using the voice part of the network.
It uses the EDGE or 3G connection, giving you much higher speed, sometimes higher than DSL.
Even if that's not available, your speed will be slighter faster than a dialup connection, as some of the overhead is gone. And it won't use minutes. Also you can make and receive calls during it. (Although you will end up with almost no bandwidth during the calls.)
1) I don't know if it's NATing or bridging, but whatever. The computer is essentially on the cell phone data network.
Yeah, the 'don't cheat tivo' people are pretty stupid.
Hell, the entire thing is stupid. Why the hell doesn't Tivo want third parties things to run on their stuff?
The work fixing the 'lifetime subscription' issue seems a lot less than the idiotic arms race. Just send everyone who currently has such a machine a notice they have to sign up for a free account, which acts just like a subscription but is magically paid each month. And after six month disable the 'lifetime subscription' downloads.
The problem, of course, is that Tivo's business model requires subscribers, and that people would quickly release tools replacing their subscription with free sources.
Which is what the 'don't cheat cheat tivo' don't seem to be able to distinguish. Half them seem to think that's 'cheating' Tivo too. No, stopping using a service that you're under no contractual obligation to use is not 'cheating', and neither is reprogramming a piece of hardware you own to do whatever you want. (As long as, like I said, this reprogramming isn't to get free access to a subscription service without paying.)
Tivo could easily support themselves on the machines alone. If they can't, they need to raise the price of their machine, and/or provide other services besides a channel guide through their subscription. Which they, in fact, do. If they still can't support themselves, well, sucks to be them. (I don't know why they couldn't support themselves with sales, considering that people can generally make a Tivo-like machine for almost the amount they sell them for, so they have to be making money on the sales. Massproducing a tiny computer with TV recording capabilities would seem to be a reasonable business plan even without subscriptions.)
It is morally dubious to sell people a machine they can only use if they're willing to pay a certain amount of money each month for a service you provide, and then complain when they figure out ways around needing that service. If you don't want that to happen, require them to sign a contact (Like the cell phone people do with locked phones, which is why I don't have much sympathy for unlockers.), or simply charge them more to start with. Don't whine and bitch and lock down the machine.
Yeah, I don't have a lot of sympathy for cell companies. Unlocking phones is sorta like stealing from the local loan shark. (Actually, loan sharks have more competition.)
As for the CueCat, a laughably dumb business model is not, in fact, a problem for anyone but the investors.
Which results in people getting less jail time if they actually are involved in a child porn ring, as opposed to having the stuff put o their computer without their knowledge, or having downloading it from some generic porn site without the knowledge the people were underaged.
At some point, rewarding people for 'talking' via the making deals starts rewarding the worse criminals because the other criminals have nothing to bargain with.
Which is why I said it the way I did. People should not have any punishment for possession if they cooperate with the police, even if said cooperation goes nowhere, not if they have valuable information and turn it over, which is normally how 'deals' work.
Eight hours is not enough, and neither is requiring all devices that get that information to have a tuner. Perhaps someone wants to put it on a web page, and things like that.
Which is an argument for doing exactly what I said, not the opposite.;)
For all I know, it is immensely complicated to get a listing of TV shows. But that's all the more reason for the TV stations to do it once, and publish it in some standard format (An RSS feed with some custom fields is probably the best bet right now.), instead of having five third parties come in, do it themselves, and sell the results and attempt to keep copyright over the listings.
Are you crazy? You could argue that Bill Clinton's family now will 'remain on top', but it's not because he was born into wealth. His is not a 'wealthy family'. His step-father was co-owner of an auto-dealership.
Nor is he particularly wealthy currently, either. He could live off his fame, all former presidents can do that, but his assets have him nowhere near the superrich.
And the 'Kerry' family isn't rich. The 'Heinz' amily is the rich one, which Kerry married into. (I'm not disagreeing with you about John Kerry, he will never have to work, I'm just pointing out that 'Kerry' is not a rich family per se.)
That is possibly the stupidest review process I've ever heard of.
Surely Apple has some sort of iPhone emulator they can install on and see what files it accesses.
Hell, in this case, your phone number is being transmitted in cleartext, which should have been noticed via a sniffing.
Obviously, nothing could even entirely be 100% sure, (See: Halting problem), but it could be made damn hard for apps to do that sort of stuff.
At this point, it's looking like Apple's entire 'review' process is solely to keep competitors out. Yes, yes, I've always heard people say that, but I actually believe they were at least also keeping malicious software out.
I am not aware of that digital TV provides future programming information.
Providing what is currently on the channel is all well and good for TV stations, but they really need a place to download upcoming stuff.
Heck, they could encode the URL of the file in the channel itself so that devices could pick it up automatically, during the original auto-tune. Then cable companies don't have to worry about collecting it.
Even if the upcoming shows are on the channel, unless it covers a week in advance or something, it's not that useful. You shouldn't have to 'update guide data while watching a channel', because the box should have an entire week in advance always.
It's because Tivo is so stupid that their 'lifetime subscription' model does not, in fact, actually have a 'lifetime subscription'. Instead the software on 'lifetime subscription' Tivos just doesn't bother to check if you have a subscription.
Hence the tiniest bit of software hacking on the other Tivos can magically give you a lifetime subscription. (And, presumably, because that software is actually signed by Tivo, said Tivo will have no idea it was actually originally not a lifetime subscription one.)
This is, somewhat reasonably, seen as a scam. Hence the 'don't cheat Tivo' idiocy. It's because it is impossibly easy to cheat Tivo.
If they would have actually given a real subscription to the 'lifetime subscription' people, none of this would matter. (This would also let people move said subscriptions to other machines.)
The 'don't cheat Tivo' people are sorta the equivalent of people like me, who thinks it's somewhat unethical to 'unlock' phones, because said locked phones were sold at a discount with a specific restriction on them, and if you wanted an unlocked one you know where to buy them. But I have to put up with the idiotic unlock people when I want to jailbreak my iPhone.
There's a line between 'Using the hardware you own however you want to', and 'Getting out of an agreement you made with a company when you bought the hardware', and even 'Using a service you have no right to because the permission check was in your hardware device'.
I'm a big fan of the first. If I happen to come into possession of a Tivo, or an iPhone, or whatever, I should be able to 'break in' and make it do whatever I want. Use other services, make it a general purpose computer, whatever. (Note I'm not saying they have to 'let' me do that, or make it easy for me, I'm saying I should have the right to try. Although I do think GPL devices should have to let me, which is why I promote GPL 3.)
But 'whatever I want' doesn't including having the device connect to some service provided by the manufacturer where there's supposed to be a monthly fee. Likewise, if I purchased my hardware at a discount that required two years of service on their network before I actually owned it, then I don't get to claim it was 'lost', keep it, and use it somewhere else after a month.
The problem is that a lot of companies that sell 'closed box' hardware put the damn checks in the software, so anyone who breaks in can undo them, so they can claim those people are doing it solely to steal from them. I used to be on their side, but now I'm starting to suspect they're doing this on purpose so they have some reason to whine when people want to repurpose their hardware for something else. (Because their business model actually requires selling the service, but they don't want to make people actually sign contracts.)
Re:Sorry, what you're asking for is too easy to ab
on
Reusing Old TiVo Hardware?
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
The idea that the 'channel guide' is some valuable thing is stupid anyway.
We need to get away from the entire model of having third parties provide guides.
Channels should provide their programming guide. Each channel should, somewhere, have that information in a standard format.
And a list of the links to those guides should be collected on the cable and sat providers websites, in some format computers and boxes can important them.(And I'm sure someone would provide broadcast lists for major metropolitan areas.)
Someone makes a damn standard XML format, and the channels would just dump their data straight into it. It's like 20 fucking hours of programming, one time, to publish their damn schedule, and from them on it just works.
The idea that anyone should ever pay for that data shows how retarded the media companies are in this country. You should want to tell us what's on your channel, you morons, so we can watch it. Because you are too flat-out bone stupid to do that, we have to pay other people to do it for us.
Can you imagine if other places worked this way? What if each bus had its own schedule that they didn't bother to make public, so we had 'bus guide' companies that would run around peacing the entire system together and changing us whenever it changed?
No, witches didn't come back up for air. They didn't need to breath.
You'd think, at some point, the logic would kick and they'd realize that no one, in fact, ever managed to not drown, and hence a) none of those people were witches, in which case the court system is broken, b) witches choose to drown instead of revealing themselves, in which case there's not any point to this, or c) witches can fake their own death, which makes this even more completely pointless.
Indeed. In fact, almost all child porn is released to 'friends'. There are rings of child abusers, and they send pictures to each other. Not on the internet, or at least not openly on the internet.
At some point, someone in that ring is, in fact, in it for a profit, and he'll 'pirate' that image and sell it to other rings.
At some point after that, it will escape into the wild as some anonymous person puts it on the internet. Sometimes it will skip the middle step.
Actual child porn producers do not want that image in the wild, because very quickly after it ends up in the wild, the FBI will discover it, and track them down, or at least track the kid down.
What we need to do is decriminalize possession if the person cooperates with the authorities and helps them backtrack the image.
5) People who download porn from dubious sites and get some 17 year old Russia girl who could entirely pass for an adult. (Can you magically tell the difference between a 17 year old and an 18 year old, or even a 16 year old and a 22 year old?)
6) People who don't download anything knowingly, just follow a bad link trying to get some warez or, hell, have a malware infection like this guy.
Seriously, the laws are idiotic.
Possession laws in general are dubious to start with, but at least with, for example, drugs, people aren't trying to buy sugar and ending up with heroin, or having people just wander by and stick five kilos of cocaine under the seat of their car.
Erm...unless the phone wanders into range of a wifi network, and gets on that, in which case the phone company firewalling the phone network is hardly going to do anything.
Incidentally, I was unaware that phones actually could communicate with each other over the NAT IPs given out by the phone company. Interesting. That opens up all sorts of interesting concepts...
He thought mathematically turning bits into something else could alter their color, a classic mistake when programmers try to apply computer science to copyright law.
And the real joke is, there are bands that are so identical sounding to The Beatles that no one is very likely to tell them apart. Seriously. There are note perfect 'cover' bands. You can run their damn music through those 'acoustic fingerprinting' programs and it will register as The Beatles song.
He could have just recorded one of them and sold their music. Maybe 10% of the people would notice it wasn't the original, off-the-album recording they're used to, and maybe 1% would notice it wasn't The Beatles at all.
But the problem there is, I suspect, he'd have to pay them. (Also I think he was trying to keep from paying lyric and music licensing fees either.)
Slashdot Mirror
Everyone's doing math like they'd keep this dome at roof temperature.
I think it's far more likely the insides would be more around 40-50 degrees. Somewhere above freezing (Which solves a whole host of problems related to water damage, and lets snow melt off the dome.), letting people walk around without their fingers falling off, but not actually 'You don't need to heat your house at all'.
It isn't a question as to which is 'more efficient', building or dome heating, because they would actually be working together.
More generally, in the US, the designation of all divisions of a state is defined by state law. (Often in their constitution.) Counties, cities, towns, boroughs, whatever.
As is how they become that thing, and what sort of government they have, etc.
The federal government really has no concept of 'city' or whatever, although I think the census bureau has invented a few purely for statistical grouping, and they will use state-level grouping also when talking about things. (But none of that really means anything, officially.)
Now, the feds do have a concept of 'urban' vs. 'rural', based on population density. Fun fact: New Jersey is officially 100% urban.
Uhhh...that's cheaper because it doesn't do what a roof does.
It doesn't insulate and it doesn't reflect the heat away from the house.
You essentially need an 'underroof' at that point, something on top of the ceiling that serves the purpose of the roof.
It is not cheaper than normal to build a house with a flat roof and then build a greenhouse on top of that roof, which is what you've actually suggested here.
And it's certainly not cheaper in any climate that would be described as 'tropical'.
Even with an older, fairly non-reflective roof, the heated up part is the 'outside' of the roof, whereas with a greenhouse, the heat would end up being on the 'underroof'. Even if you open the greenhouse totally to the outside air, it's still worse than a normal roof, which at least has an air buffer which it has to heat first. (And that itself can be vented.)
Such a greenhouse might make sense in cold climates where cooling is never an issue, although freezing and snow would present interesting problems...your roof would not heat up as quickly to melt the snow, hence removing some of the 'greenhouse effect' you're counting on to heat the house, and resulting in a freezing 'greenhouse'. (Which is hopefully insulated, via the underroof, from the actual house, or all the hot air ends up in there.) OTOH, you could hook up 'defrosters' like in cars and melt the snow from the inside.
I'm not sure what collecting roof runoff has to do with anything. Most traditional roofs have gutters, and, hence, could easily collect runoff if people wanted.
Um, if you're going to dramatically restructure houses to that extent, you might as well just build them underground, which will result in almost trivial heating costs, and the same with cooling.
And, um, you're wrong about how much fans you'd need. For example, you seem to think you'd need them inside a house, that central air would not do enough.
Which is just silly. If central air actual did leave dead pockets of air in a house, it'd be leaving them now (Considering the negligable effect wind has on sealed houses.), and you'd suffocate by walking though them.
You no more need fans everywhere than fishtanks need giant turbines moving oxygenated air around. No, you need something putting oxygen bubbles in at the bottom, and normal movement will stir things enough.
Now, it's possible that the amount of air you'd need to let in would reduce the gains from the dome to nothing, in which case it's pointless, but saying 'everyone would die' is just silly. We actually let people operate combustion engines in enclosed spaces currently, like in the chunnel.
That's not tethering. That's a dialup connection.
It a) is limited to modem speed, aka, 56kps (Actually, a little lower, as cell phone have lossier encoding.), b) uses your minutes, and c) stops you from making or receiving calls.
It doesn't use 'data' at all.
Tethering is the phone NATing(1) the IP address it is given by the data part of the cell phone network, instead of posing as a 'modem' and using the voice part of the network.
It uses the EDGE or 3G connection, giving you much higher speed, sometimes higher than DSL.
Even if that's not available, your speed will be slighter faster than a dialup connection, as some of the overhead is gone. And it won't use minutes. Also you can make and receive calls during it. (Although you will end up with almost no bandwidth during the calls.)
1) I don't know if it's NATing or bridging, but whatever. The computer is essentially on the cell phone data network.
Yeah, the 'don't cheat tivo' people are pretty stupid.
Hell, the entire thing is stupid. Why the hell doesn't Tivo want third parties things to run on their stuff?
The work fixing the 'lifetime subscription' issue seems a lot less than the idiotic arms race. Just send everyone who currently has such a machine a notice they have to sign up for a free account, which acts just like a subscription but is magically paid each month. And after six month disable the 'lifetime subscription' downloads.
The problem, of course, is that Tivo's business model requires subscribers, and that people would quickly release tools replacing their subscription with free sources.
Which is what the 'don't cheat cheat tivo' don't seem to be able to distinguish. Half them seem to think that's 'cheating' Tivo too. No, stopping using a service that you're under no contractual obligation to use is not 'cheating', and neither is reprogramming a piece of hardware you own to do whatever you want. (As long as, like I said, this reprogramming isn't to get free access to a subscription service without paying.)
Tivo could easily support themselves on the machines alone. If they can't, they need to raise the price of their machine, and/or provide other services besides a channel guide through their subscription. Which they, in fact, do. If they still can't support themselves, well, sucks to be them. (I don't know why they couldn't support themselves with sales, considering that people can generally make a Tivo-like machine for almost the amount they sell them for, so they have to be making money on the sales. Massproducing a tiny computer with TV recording capabilities would seem to be a reasonable business plan even without subscriptions.)
It is morally dubious to sell people a machine they can only use if they're willing to pay a certain amount of money each month for a service you provide, and then complain when they figure out ways around needing that service. If you don't want that to happen, require them to sign a contact (Like the cell phone people do with locked phones, which is why I don't have much sympathy for unlockers.), or simply charge them more to start with. Don't whine and bitch and lock down the machine.
Yeah, I don't have a lot of sympathy for cell companies. Unlocking phones is sorta like stealing from the local loan shark. (Actually, loan sharks have more competition.)
As for the CueCat, a laughably dumb business model is not, in fact, a problem for anyone but the investors.
The barcode scanner industry is still going fine.
$50 million and $100 million puts people nowhere near the top couple percent we were talking about.
Which results in people getting less jail time if they actually are involved in a child porn ring, as opposed to having the stuff put o their computer without their knowledge, or having downloading it from some generic porn site without the knowledge the people were underaged.
At some point, rewarding people for 'talking' via the making deals starts rewarding the worse criminals because the other criminals have nothing to bargain with.
Which is why I said it the way I did. People should not have any punishment for possession if they cooperate with the police, even if said cooperation goes nowhere, not if they have valuable information and turn it over, which is normally how 'deals' work.
Eight hours is not enough, and neither is requiring all devices that get that information to have a tuner. Perhaps someone wants to put it on a web page, and things like that.
Which is an argument for doing exactly what I said, not the opposite. ;)
For all I know, it is immensely complicated to get a listing of TV shows. But that's all the more reason for the TV stations to do it once, and publish it in some standard format (An RSS feed with some custom fields is probably the best bet right now.), instead of having five third parties come in, do it themselves, and sell the results and attempt to keep copyright over the listings.
Clintons?
Are you crazy? You could argue that Bill Clinton's family now will 'remain on top', but it's not because he was born into wealth. His is not a 'wealthy family'. His step-father was co-owner of an auto-dealership.
Nor is he particularly wealthy currently, either. He could live off his fame, all former presidents can do that, but his assets have him nowhere near the superrich.
And the 'Kerry' family isn't rich. The 'Heinz' amily is the rich one, which Kerry married into. (I'm not disagreeing with you about John Kerry, he will never have to work, I'm just pointing out that 'Kerry' is not a rich family per se.)
Cheney's family wasn't rich either.
That is possibly the stupidest review process I've ever heard of.
Surely Apple has some sort of iPhone emulator they can install on and see what files it accesses.
Hell, in this case, your phone number is being transmitted in cleartext, which should have been noticed via a sniffing.
Obviously, nothing could even entirely be 100% sure, (See: Halting problem), but it could be made damn hard for apps to do that sort of stuff.
At this point, it's looking like Apple's entire 'review' process is solely to keep competitors out. Yes, yes, I've always heard people say that, but I actually believe they were at least also keeping malicious software out.
Exactly.
Apple is playing both sides here. Either their app store is safe, or it isn't.
If it isn't safe, 90% of their excuse for not allowing people to download apps from anyone is nonsense.
I am not aware of that digital TV provides future programming information.
Providing what is currently on the channel is all well and good for TV stations, but they really need a place to download upcoming stuff.
Heck, they could encode the URL of the file in the channel itself so that devices could pick it up automatically, during the original auto-tune. Then cable companies don't have to worry about collecting it.
Even if the upcoming shows are on the channel, unless it covers a week in advance or something, it's not that useful. You shouldn't have to 'update guide data while watching a channel', because the box should have an entire week in advance always.
It's because Tivo is so stupid that their 'lifetime subscription' model does not, in fact, actually have a 'lifetime subscription'. Instead the software on 'lifetime subscription' Tivos just doesn't bother to check if you have a subscription.
Hence the tiniest bit of software hacking on the other Tivos can magically give you a lifetime subscription. (And, presumably, because that software is actually signed by Tivo, said Tivo will have no idea it was actually originally not a lifetime subscription one.)
This is, somewhat reasonably, seen as a scam. Hence the 'don't cheat Tivo' idiocy. It's because it is impossibly easy to cheat Tivo.
If they would have actually given a real subscription to the 'lifetime subscription' people, none of this would matter. (This would also let people move said subscriptions to other machines.)
The 'don't cheat Tivo' people are sorta the equivalent of people like me, who thinks it's somewhat unethical to 'unlock' phones, because said locked phones were sold at a discount with a specific restriction on them, and if you wanted an unlocked one you know where to buy them. But I have to put up with the idiotic unlock people when I want to jailbreak my iPhone.
There's a line between 'Using the hardware you own however you want to', and 'Getting out of an agreement you made with a company when you bought the hardware', and even 'Using a service you have no right to because the permission check was in your hardware device'.
I'm a big fan of the first. If I happen to come into possession of a Tivo, or an iPhone, or whatever, I should be able to 'break in' and make it do whatever I want. Use other services, make it a general purpose computer, whatever. (Note I'm not saying they have to 'let' me do that, or make it easy for me, I'm saying I should have the right to try. Although I do think GPL devices should have to let me, which is why I promote GPL 3.)
But 'whatever I want' doesn't including having the device connect to some service provided by the manufacturer where there's supposed to be a monthly fee. Likewise, if I purchased my hardware at a discount that required two years of service on their network before I actually owned it, then I don't get to claim it was 'lost', keep it, and use it somewhere else after a month.
The problem is that a lot of companies that sell 'closed box' hardware put the damn checks in the software, so anyone who breaks in can undo them, so they can claim those people are doing it solely to steal from them. I used to be on their side, but now I'm starting to suspect they're doing this on purpose so they have some reason to whine when people want to repurpose their hardware for something else. (Because their business model actually requires selling the service, but they don't want to make people actually sign contracts.)
The idea that the 'channel guide' is some valuable thing is stupid anyway.
We need to get away from the entire model of having third parties provide guides.
Channels should provide their programming guide. Each channel should, somewhere, have that information in a standard format.
And a list of the links to those guides should be collected on the cable and sat providers websites, in some format computers and boxes can important them.(And I'm sure someone would provide broadcast lists for major metropolitan areas.)
Someone makes a damn standard XML format, and the channels would just dump their data straight into it. It's like 20 fucking hours of programming, one time, to publish their damn schedule, and from them on it just works.
The idea that anyone should ever pay for that data shows how retarded the media companies are in this country. You should want to tell us what's on your channel, you morons, so we can watch it. Because you are too flat-out bone stupid to do that, we have to pay other people to do it for us.
Can you imagine if other places worked this way? What if each bus had its own schedule that they didn't bother to make public, so we had 'bus guide' companies that would run around peacing the entire system together and changing us whenever it changed?
No, witches didn't come back up for air. They didn't need to breath.
You'd think, at some point, the logic would kick and they'd realize that no one, in fact, ever managed to not drown, and hence a) none of those people were witches, in which case the court system is broken, b) witches choose to drown instead of revealing themselves, in which case there's not any point to this, or c) witches can fake their own death, which makes this even more completely pointless.
Indeed. In fact, almost all child porn is released to 'friends'. There are rings of child abusers, and they send pictures to each other. Not on the internet, or at least not openly on the internet.
At some point, someone in that ring is, in fact, in it for a profit, and he'll 'pirate' that image and sell it to other rings.
At some point after that, it will escape into the wild as some anonymous person puts it on the internet. Sometimes it will skip the middle step.
Actual child porn producers do not want that image in the wild, because very quickly after it ends up in the wild, the FBI will discover it, and track them down, or at least track the kid down.
What we need to do is decriminalize possession if the person cooperates with the authorities and helps them backtrack the image.
And
5) People who download porn from dubious sites and get some 17 year old Russia girl who could entirely pass for an adult. (Can you magically tell the difference between a 17 year old and an 18 year old, or even a 16 year old and a 22 year old?)
6) People who don't download anything knowingly, just follow a bad link trying to get some warez or, hell, have a malware infection like this guy.
Seriously, the laws are idiotic.
Possession laws in general are dubious to start with, but at least with, for example, drugs, people aren't trying to buy sugar and ending up with heroin, or having people just wander by and stick five kilos of cocaine under the seat of their car.
Erm, it doesn't have to be done though MobileTerminal, it can be done through SSH, of course.
Erm...unless the phone wanders into range of a wifi network, and gets on that, in which case the phone company firewalling the phone network is hardly going to do anything.
Incidentally, I was unaware that phones actually could communicate with each other over the NAT IPs given out by the phone company. Interesting. That opens up all sorts of interesting concepts...
Except there's no into the command line except SSH, and hence no way to change the password.
'First run' behavior is pretty meaningless when it's a daemon process installed from an interface that doesn't allow it to prompt.
What Colour are your bits?.
He thought mathematically turning bits into something else could alter their color, a classic mistake when programmers try to apply computer science to copyright law.
And the real joke is, there are bands that are so identical sounding to The Beatles that no one is very likely to tell them apart. Seriously. There are note perfect 'cover' bands. You can run their damn music through those 'acoustic fingerprinting' programs and it will register as The Beatles song.
He could have just recorded one of them and sold their music. Maybe 10% of the people would notice it wasn't the original, off-the-album recording they're used to, and maybe 1% would notice it wasn't The Beatles at all.
But the problem there is, I suspect, he'd have to pay them. (Also I think he was trying to keep from paying lyric and music licensing fees either.)