I'm not sure what the depreciation and other costs on a truck are, but I remember seeing billboards advertising $1-$2 per mile more for owner operators. I mean, that cursorily sounds like a good premium.
Although it was really funny, since the ads were in rapid succession. I saw one ad, it offered X, and a mile down the road I saw another ad offering like 60% of X.
That's pretty dumb. Some people can eat whatever they want and stay skinny. Some people have to work really hard. As long as being thin is an advantage, I see no reason to work hard to get it.
If there were a gene that made you smarter, would you write something like "you should just read more books"?
Surely you are aware that many people can afford neither the time nor the money to have "three meals a day from fresh vegetables they pick up in the farmer's market", right?
Have you had a lawyer weigh in? Because that doesn't sound like it really you really shifted the burden of proof. Since "no one read it", it doesn't really reflect a meeting of the minds. And since the addendum solely would be seen as the enumerating the IP that is excluded, I wonder if it would have to be read.
I am not a lawyer, but I do know that trying to put overbroad/too lopsided language in a contract can backfire. Esp. if the other party has deeper pockets.
She's until proven guilty. If you want to prove that you shouldn't be extradited and face trial, they have a lower burden. Just like a grand jury has to agree you should be prosecuted before the trial starts. They don't need to believe it beyond a reasonable doubt, that's what the later trial is for.
I think Apple still supports the App Store even for older devices
I know that iOS 11 was a change that broke a lot of apps, but I don't know if iOS 10 devices could find the old versions. iOS 11 (and 12) are supported on 5 year old devices... which is when Apple switched to 64-bit CPUs. Also, the breaking change is making the apps 64-bit (iOS 10 would show warnings on 32-bit apps but still run them).
No one thinks ex-government employees lobbying because of what they know is problematic. It's an issue because they're selling who they know, those relationships. And, more importantly, what \they're selling to current government officials is the ability to also become a highly paid lobbyist... if they vote the right way now. It's a deferred bribe/government official safety net.
There just aren't that many coal miners that they matter. I mean, outside of W.VA and Pennsylvania, it's hard to see any state getting pushed by the coal miner vote. And since W. VA is going red regardless, it's just one more issue that may influence one swing state. Seems better to try to convert the many times as large suburban swing population.
Please let me know how someone intends to regulate such a thing.
Massive fines (for managers and the company) might dissuade large companies, given the high risk. Imagine if, as punishment for one of these FB scandals, Zuckerberg and Sandberg had half their personal fortunes forfeited and FB was fined 100 billion by the government. I mean, it might not stop some small company that doesn't have much to lose, but their abuse seems less scary.
Panasonic owns a lot of the battery tech, or part of the gigafactory, or something. I know they let Tesla put their name alone on everything, but I'm curious about the IP/ownership there.
Most websites would rather you download their app. After all, they cannot keep running their snooping software on your phone when you leave the page, but the app is always there.
24 FPS, psychologically, looks fake. So movies tend to look like good fakes. 60 FPS, psychologically, looks real. So movies tend to look like somewhat off reality. Look up the uncanny valley.
Now, it's possibly that how movies are created can be changed to prevent that, but it's true of current and older movies.
It's speeding "innovation", that is, the ability of Google to supplant W3C as the maintainers of HTML5+, allowing them to add lots more support for ads and tracking.
It is going to kill competition, for the same reason that IE6 killed competition - there will be no spec to write to (or the Chromium implementation will differ from the spec), so you'll have to use the supplied engine or GTFO.
Please. IE6 broke every standard it could (although IE5.5, for macs, was remarkably compliant.) They started adhering to more standards as it went through 7, 8 and 9 (the most standard uncompliant thing in 9 was websites could include tags that said "render this like you were IE6, 7 or 8") By 11 I'm not aware of any issues, and Edge was designed to the specification. I recall MS would proudly pointing to stupid edge cases it didn't comply, show how no one did, and explain why complying would cause major issues.
Meanwhile, Chrome has been becoming more and more like IE6, inventing new optional add-ons, and doing its own EEE to the free webstandards. Meanwhile, Google has been downranking pages that don't use their EEE "features" to force websites to integrate them. It's at least as evil as MS wanting to own the browser on PCs, because at least then it just would render the page slightly off if you didn't buy into the monopolist's browser. Now, you (essentially) don't exist, cause you're on page 103 of the search results.
I know that. My point was they're not even using non-FB owned apps (e.g. Snapchat, Signal) to communicate. Because even using the same phone is giving FB too much information.
They're not trying to protect the info from the government. Just from a phone that has FB installed. Just gives you an indication of how hard it is to get the spying to stop, how deep they look at calls and SMS messages and GPS, etc.
Perhaps some new technological breakthrough will make it more possible, but there's no particular reason to believe that breakthrough won't also bring it within reach of NGOs or even wealthy individuals.
The NSA, etc. are willing to pay billions for a QC that can crack RSA. Hell, they'd spend billions on a coinflip where "heads" got them that QC.That means they can sponsor research, build a giant infrastructure to keep it near absolute zero, and do other things that really are out of reach of NGOs or wealthy individuals.
There's also the fact that I'm not really sure what uses a QC has other than codebreaking. I mean, I know a lot of things (e.g. the travelling salesman problem) need a QC to actually solved, but it seems like the heuristics do a pretty good job in reasonable time.
Since it was buried either as an AC response, or an AC response to an AC:
EEC is vulnerable because "QCs can solve the abelian hidden subgroup problem, which ECC is within." However, RSA (and other prime factorization issues) are cracked by QCs using Shor's Algorithm. The same algorithm cannot be used on ECC.
Of non-mass spammed comments, the hugely vast majority (99.7%) were in favor of NN. So, if none of the Russian emails were in favor of NN, it would drop to only 99.2% of people were in favor. If half a percent (0.5%) of the Russian comments were anti-NN, that would leave it at 100% in favor.
That said, the non-mass spammed numbers came from this. I hope those numbers were correct.
I thought elliptical curve cryptography was good enough?
Also, it occurs to me they're concerned about a "20 year" timespan to get it widely deployed. Maybe a truly excellent algorithm just got patented, and they have to wait until it's unencumbered for it to spread?
Slashdot Mirror
It seems like the tax is designed to prevent "tear down and sit on land/sell vacant lot." As opposed to "tear down and rebuild.
They already smacked that scientist doing CRSPR to a baby down pretty hard. It seems to have been a clear signal.
Or, the way that would makes sense, Uber pays the passenger's bills and then tries to get money from the person who hit the car.
I'm not sure what the depreciation and other costs on a truck are, but I remember seeing billboards advertising $1-$2 per mile more for owner operators. I mean, that cursorily sounds like a good premium.
Although it was really funny, since the ads were in rapid succession. I saw one ad, it offered X, and a mile down the road I saw another ad offering like 60% of X.
That's pretty dumb. Some people can eat whatever they want and stay skinny. Some people have to work really hard. As long as being thin is an advantage, I see no reason to work hard to get it.
If there were a gene that made you smarter, would you write something like "you should just read more books"?
Surely you are aware that many people can afford neither the time nor the money to have "three meals a day from fresh vegetables they pick up in the farmer's market", right?
Have you had a lawyer weigh in? Because that doesn't sound like it really you really shifted the burden of proof. Since "no one read it", it doesn't really reflect a meeting of the minds. And since the addendum solely would be seen as the enumerating the IP that is excluded, I wonder if it would have to be read.
I am not a lawyer, but I do know that trying to put overbroad/too lopsided language in a contract can backfire. Esp. if the other party has deeper pockets.
She's until proven guilty. If you want to prove that you shouldn't be extradited and face trial, they have a lower burden. Just like a grand jury has to agree you should be prosecuted before the trial starts. They don't need to believe it beyond a reasonable doubt, that's what the later trial is for.
I know that iOS 11 was a change that broke a lot of apps, but I don't know if iOS 10 devices could find the old versions. iOS 11 (and 12) are supported on 5 year old devices... which is when Apple switched to 64-bit CPUs. Also, the breaking change is making the apps 64-bit (iOS 10 would show warnings on 32-bit apps but still run them).
No one thinks ex-government employees lobbying because of what they know is problematic. It's an issue because they're selling who they know, those relationships. And, more importantly, what \they're selling to current government officials is the ability to also become a highly paid lobbyist... if they vote the right way now. It's a deferred bribe/government official safety net.
There just aren't that many coal miners that they matter. I mean, outside of W.VA and Pennsylvania, it's hard to see any state getting pushed by the coal miner vote. And since W. VA is going red regardless, it's just one more issue that may influence one swing state. Seems better to try to convert the many times as large suburban swing population.
Massive fines (for managers and the company) might dissuade large companies, given the high risk. Imagine if, as punishment for one of these FB scandals, Zuckerberg and Sandberg had half their personal fortunes forfeited and FB was fined 100 billion by the government. I mean, it might not stop some small company that doesn't have much to lose, but their abuse seems less scary.
Panasonic owns a lot of the battery tech, or part of the gigafactory, or something. I know they let Tesla put their name alone on everything, but I'm curious about the IP/ownership there.
Anyone have a good summary?
Most websites would rather you download their app. After all, they cannot keep running their snooping software on your phone when you leave the page, but the app is always there.
Edge was a ground-up rewrite.
I'm aware of 0 non-standard rendering issues in IE11 or Edge. Also, as far as I know, Edge has fewer non-standard JS issues than Chrome.
24 FPS, psychologically, looks fake. So movies tend to look like good fakes. 60 FPS, psychologically, looks real. So movies tend to look like somewhat off reality. Look up the uncanny valley.
Now, it's possibly that how movies are created can be changed to prevent that, but it's true of current and older movies.
It's speeding "innovation", that is, the ability of Google to supplant W3C as the maintainers of HTML5+, allowing them to add lots more support for ads and tracking.
It is going to kill competition, for the same reason that IE6 killed competition - there will be no spec to write to (or the Chromium implementation will differ from the spec), so you'll have to use the supplied engine or GTFO.
Please. IE6 broke every standard it could (although IE5.5, for macs, was remarkably compliant.) They started adhering to more standards as it went through 7, 8 and 9 (the most standard uncompliant thing in 9 was websites could include tags that said "render this like you were IE6, 7 or 8") By 11 I'm not aware of any issues, and Edge was designed to the specification. I recall MS would proudly pointing to stupid edge cases it didn't comply, show how no one did, and explain why complying would cause major issues.
Meanwhile, Chrome has been becoming more and more like IE6, inventing new optional add-ons, and doing its own EEE to the free webstandards. Meanwhile, Google has been downranking pages that don't use their EEE "features" to force websites to integrate them. It's at least as evil as MS wanting to own the browser on PCs, because at least then it just would render the page slightly off if you didn't buy into the monopolist's browser. Now, you (essentially) don't exist, cause you're on page 103 of the search results.
I know that. My point was they're not even using non-FB owned apps (e.g. Snapchat, Signal) to communicate. Because even using the same phone is giving FB too much information.
They're not trying to protect the info from the government. Just from a phone that has FB installed. Just gives you an indication of how hard it is to get the spying to stop, how deep they look at calls and SMS messages and GPS, etc.
The NSA, etc. are willing to pay billions for a QC that can crack RSA. Hell, they'd spend billions on a coinflip where "heads" got them that QC.That means they can sponsor research, build a giant infrastructure to keep it near absolute zero, and do other things that really are out of reach of NGOs or wealthy individuals.
There's also the fact that I'm not really sure what uses a QC has other than codebreaking. I mean, I know a lot of things (e.g. the travelling salesman problem) need a QC to actually solved, but it seems like the heuristics do a pretty good job in reasonable time.
Since it was buried either as an AC response, or an AC response to an AC:
EEC is vulnerable because "QCs can solve the abelian hidden subgroup problem, which ECC is within." However, RSA (and other prime factorization issues) are cracked by QCs using Shor's Algorithm. The same algorithm cannot be used on ECC.
Of non-mass spammed comments, the hugely vast majority (99.7%) were in favor of NN. So, if none of the Russian emails were in favor of NN, it would drop to only 99.2% of people were in favor. If half a percent (0.5%) of the Russian comments were anti-NN, that would leave it at 100% in favor.
That said, the non-mass spammed numbers came from this. I hope those numbers were correct.
I thought elliptical curve cryptography was good enough?
Also, it occurs to me they're concerned about a "20 year" timespan to get it widely deployed. Maybe a truly excellent algorithm just got patented, and they have to wait until it's unencumbered for it to spread?