Things in the virtual world should be treated as their real-world equivalents.
There's no law that prevents me from going to a Chick-Fil-A and standing in line, and when I get up to the front to order saying "I'd like... hrm... um.. I would liiiike.... oh yeah, I'd like marriage equality for homosexuals." If I get a few thousand of my friends together to do just that, I've created a real world DDOS that is entirely legal.
Similarly, there is no law that prevents me from requesting index.html on a site. If I get a few thousand of my friends together to do that, I've done a DDOS. So why should that be illegal?
If that's all that DDOSing a site actually was in reality, then You would have a point. However, practically all DDOS attacks involve the use of zombie machines on botnets. Once you start using other people property without their consent to bring a web server to it's knees we have a problem.
Wouldn't coatings with complex surface geometry like that have issues with friction wearing them flat? I could see that not being a big deal on rigid surfaces that don't really contact anything, but other products, like clothing seem like they would be especially troublesome. Even on things like windshields seem like they would pose a problem with the wiper blades constantly rubbing the surface down.
Yes the point is that you can make it "later" instead of "sooner". Example of this is the Google Native Client which exposes OS services through only an API consisting of a handful of allowed methods compared to the thousands of the Java platform. It is a lot easier to make 10 methods secure than 1000.
Native Client can run C code inside the Sandbox, so you can still take advantage of existing libraries.
Hmm... The mantra I always hear is "Don't try to write a function from scratch that has already been written".
I could never understand people like you that seem to fear science. Why go about denying a possibly useful tool? Regulate it, keep it safe but never out right ban things that's just foolish.
Right, so we should take that petition to build the Death Star seriously.
I've got bad news for you. Even if your SSD was 100% defragmented it would still be physically fragmented due to the internal wearleveling that SSDs use. They intentionally scatter storage around the drive in order to even out the amount of cell usage to prolong life.
Fragmentation in SSD does affect the system performance. It is just that the effects are much smaler than on disk, so everybody ignores it.
I've got bad news for you. Even if your SSD was 100% defragmented it would still be physically fragmented due to the internal wearleveling that SSDs use. They intentionally scatter storage around the drive in order to even out the amount of cell usage to prolong life.
Copying is not theft. Copying is not stealing. It is NOT the same thing.
Back in 1985 a man named Dowling was prosecuted for the Interstate Transportation of Stolen Property for selling infringing copies of Elvis records. U.S. Supreme Court in DOWLING v. UNITED STATES, 473 U.S. 207 (1985) http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=search&court=US&case=/us/473/207.html struck this down because copyright infringement is not theft. You have to deprive your victim of the item in order to steal it from them. Making copies doesn't deprive anyone of what is being copied, therefore its not theft.
The FAA does not have to prove that mobile devices endanger aircraft electronics. Those whose manufacture or those who want to use those devices on a plane need to prove that it doesn't.
Yes, I know that some people get a heart attack if they can't check their e-mail, FB and Twitter for 20 seconds, but last time I checked, we all agree that "default deny" is the proper firewall policy. So with all security systems. If you don't know something is harmless, you need to treat it as a potential danger, until it is proven to be safe.
And when a mistake can kill a few hundred people, you err on the side of caution. Always.
And yet Pokemon Cards are allowed on to airplanes without explicit proof of their safety. Let's not even bring pants or wristwatches in to this.
The line is where it's always been: you buy the product, it's yours, you can do whatever you like with it. It's unreasonable for a manufacturer to try to take those rights away from you.
If the product was sold to you in this state without trying to hide it then they haven't "taken" anything away from you.
If you don't want to have your iPhone stolen stop using it in public.
Great.
Or stop advertising that you have one on you by wearing it like a fashion accessory. Ahh, wait, that would defeat the entire point of owning one. What a dilemma.
It's not the *cost* of the iPhone. It's the *black market resale value* that drives theft.
It's uncomfortable allowing a third party to be able to permanently brick your phone or other device, but if that were a commonly-used option, the resale value would quickly drop down close to zero.
As always - back up your data, and don't store important personal information on your easily-stolen device...
The cost of the iPhone is what drives the black market price up to begin with. If the price from a retailer wasn't so high the amount of money paid for stolen phones wouldn't be nearly as high either (except during shortages) and the incentive to steal them would go down as well.
Except that the only part of the US they can reach with current missiles is a portion of Alaska. The only two other likely targets are South Korea and Japan, all of which are entirely within range.
Is there anything stopping them from launching this from a boat?
They have already started keeping the best for themselves. They touted PhotoSphere and the new tracing keyboard as a part of Android 4.2, yet those features are not part of AOSP and can only run on Nexus Devices (without hacking or fiddling with APKs).
My partner and I came up with a device that allows you to open a garage door with a smartphone. Just a box with a relay and a Bluetooth radio. When I started looking into whether or not we could do this for iPhone I found apples "Made for iPod" program...their hardware licensing scheme.
The first thing they asked for was our attorney's contact information.
A quick search showed me that it was going to cost in the ballpark of $20,000 to deal with Apple's bullshit. So that didn't happen.
Have you considered making this for Android? I'd jump on it right away.
Because it's so much easier to to fumble with your smartphone, launching an app, waiting for the bluetooth to connect, if it's within range, and finally being able to open the garage door (provided you did not have to remove the gloves first) than to just hit the switch strategically placed on the sun visor of your car...
Are you telling me you never wanted to open your garage door from the outside when you were NOT in your car? I'd love you have something like that as an option. If the OP would make something like this for Android I'd buy it in a second.
Slashdot Mirror
Things in the virtual world should be treated as their real-world equivalents.
There's no law that prevents me from going to a Chick-Fil-A and standing in line, and when I get up to the front to order saying "I'd like... hrm... um.. I would liiiike.... oh yeah, I'd like marriage equality for homosexuals." If I get a few thousand of my friends together to do just that, I've created a real world DDOS that is entirely legal.
Similarly, there is no law that prevents me from requesting index.html on a site. If I get a few thousand of my friends together to do that, I've done a DDOS. So why should that be illegal?
If that's all that DDOSing a site actually was in reality, then You would have a point. However, practically all DDOS attacks involve the use of zombie machines on botnets. Once you start using other people property without their consent to bring a web server to it's knees we have a problem.
Wouldn't coatings with complex surface geometry like that have issues with friction wearing them flat? I could see that not being a big deal on rigid surfaces that don't really contact anything, but other products, like clothing seem like they would be especially troublesome. Even on things like windshields seem like they would pose a problem with the wiper blades constantly rubbing the surface down.
Windows 8 Metro doesn't use .NET.
Bullshit.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jEEgfSymSqI
And that's the the first search result.
So their argument is basically "It was entrapment because you didn't let us delete the infringing files before the trial"?
Yes the point is that you can make it "later" instead of "sooner". Example of this is the Google Native Client which exposes OS services through only an API consisting of a handful of allowed methods compared to the thousands of the Java platform. It is a lot easier to make 10 methods secure than 1000.
Native Client can run C code inside the Sandbox, so you can still take advantage of existing libraries.
Hmm... The mantra I always hear is "Don't try to write a function from scratch that has already been written".
I could never understand people like you that seem to fear science. Why go about denying a possibly useful tool? Regulate it, keep it safe but never out right ban things that's just foolish.
Right, so we should take that petition to build the Death Star seriously.
There's quiet a few Android devices running Java. And developers need Java on their PCs to write apps for them
Android is NOT running java. It's applications are written in the java language, but are not compiled to java byte-code.
seal it in something already, its not a desk toy. There would be no gunk if it was not exposed to it
It's kind of useless as a reference if no one can actually refer to it.
So why do home users use Windows?
Because they don't want to deal with stuff like this just to get sound working.
https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Advanced_Linux_Sound_Architecture
I've got bad news for you. Even if your SSD was 100% defragmented it would still be physically fragmented due to the internal wearleveling that SSDs use. They intentionally scatter storage around the drive in order to even out the amount of cell usage to prolong life.
Fragmentation in SSD does affect the system performance. It is just that the effects are much smaler than on disk, so everybody ignores it.
I've got bad news for you. Even if your SSD was 100% defragmented it would still be physically fragmented due to the internal wearleveling that SSDs use. They intentionally scatter storage around the drive in order to even out the amount of cell usage to prolong life.
As a child, sure. Not as a teen though. Curfew but not a bedtime.
My parents were FAR from controlling, yet the whole way through highschool my sister and I were told many times how late we could stay up.
Based on the punishments being handed out for copying vs theft I'd have to say that copying is more illegal.
As disturbing as it is, this is one of the better arguments I've seen.
Copying is not theft. Copying is not stealing. It is NOT the same thing.
Back in 1985 a man named Dowling was prosecuted for the Interstate Transportation of Stolen Property for selling infringing copies of Elvis records. U.S. Supreme Court in DOWLING v. UNITED STATES, 473 U.S. 207 (1985) http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=search&court=US&case=/us/473/207.html struck this down because copyright infringement is not theft. You have to deprive your victim of the item in order to steal it from them. Making copies doesn't deprive anyone of what is being copied, therefore its not theft.
It is, however, just as illegal.
I think you got that backwards.
The FAA does not have to prove that mobile devices endanger aircraft electronics. Those whose manufacture or those who want to use those devices on a plane need to prove that it doesn't.
Yes, I know that some people get a heart attack if they can't check their e-mail, FB and Twitter for 20 seconds, but last time I checked, we all agree that "default deny" is the proper firewall policy. So with all security systems. If you don't know something is harmless, you need to treat it as a potential danger, until it is proven to be safe.
And when a mistake can kill a few hundred people, you err on the side of caution. Always.
And yet Pokemon Cards are allowed on to airplanes without explicit proof of their safety. Let's not even bring pants or wristwatches in to this.
The line is where it's always been: you buy the product, it's yours, you can do whatever you like with it. It's unreasonable for a manufacturer to try to take those rights away from you.
If the product was sold to you in this state without trying to hide it then they haven't "taken" anything away from you.
If you don't want to have your iPhone stolen stop using it in public.
Great.
Or stop advertising that you have one on you by wearing it like a fashion accessory. Ahh, wait, that would defeat the entire point of owning one. What a dilemma.
It's not the *cost* of the iPhone. It's the *black market resale value* that drives theft.
It's uncomfortable allowing a third party to be able to permanently brick your phone or other device, but if that were a commonly-used option, the resale value would quickly drop down close to zero.
As always - back up your data, and don't store important personal information on your easily-stolen device...
The cost of the iPhone is what drives the black market price up to begin with. If the price from a retailer wasn't so high the amount of money paid for stolen phones wouldn't be nearly as high either (except during shortages) and the incentive to steal them would go down as well.
Except that the only part of the US they can reach with current missiles is a portion of Alaska. The only two other likely targets are South Korea and Japan, all of which are entirely within range.
Is there anything stopping them from launching this from a boat?
They have already started keeping the best for themselves. They touted PhotoSphere and the new tracing keyboard as a part of Android 4.2, yet those features are not part of AOSP and can only run on Nexus Devices (without hacking or fiddling with APKs).
Because the solution isn't perfect we should do nothing at all instead.
And where does the power from heating the air come from?
My partner and I came up with a device that allows you to open a garage door with a smartphone. Just a box with a relay and a Bluetooth radio. When I started looking into whether or not we could do this for iPhone I found apples "Made for iPod" program...their hardware licensing scheme.
The first thing they asked for was our attorney's contact information.
A quick search showed me that it was going to cost in the ballpark of $20,000 to deal with Apple's bullshit. So that didn't happen.
Have you considered making this for Android? I'd jump on it right away.
Because it's so much easier to to fumble with your smartphone, launching an app, waiting for the bluetooth to connect, if it's within range, and finally being able to open the garage door (provided you did not have to remove the gloves first) than to just hit the switch strategically placed on the sun visor of your car ...
Are you telling me you never wanted to open your garage door from the outside when you were NOT in your car? I'd love you have something like that as an option. If the OP would make something like this for Android I'd buy it in a second.