Not that I would recommend it, but if that was your plan today is a good day for it. Sure, the stock market is down 4.6%, but bitcoin is down 12.6%. So you get 9.4% more bitcoin per share (average share price) today compared to yesterday.
I think the abandonded use is trying to find a compromise between losing a fight to Disney every time Steamboat Willy is about to enter the public domain and every work having a 95+year copyright.
How does the fact that an abandoned property becomes valuable enough to restore affect whether it was abandoned in the first place. Maybe if people worried about the future use of their products, they wouldn't abandon them in the first place.
We have analogs for abandoning physical things. You don't get to change your mind once the situation changes.
For a mid-to-large company, that's fine. A small company won't even have one lawyer on-staff to start the vitriol. And, as an individual, it's hard for me to imagine anywhere near as complete a system.
As I said, a great system. I wonder if there's some way to supply it as a service to the general population.
Look, either the government can override your OS restrictions, in which case they have root access to your phone and don't need the app, or they cannot override your OS restrictions, and denying the permissions is enough.
I remember our tech lead in 2003ish insisted on following MS's API and structure recommendations, which included warnings that certain calls and other aspects would be deprecated in the future. Our software worked perfectly in Vista. Many products by bigger companies failed with security ot other issues. By post-hoc fixing some of their issues, you could get them working in Vista. Win7 had the advantage of arriving after all those companies fixed their software. I'd imagine tht had far more to do with it than "MS pouring in resources".
These laws are about clarifying that SWATing is not "phoning in a false police report" (which may be a misdemeanor in some areas) but a felony. Hence, it going from a 1 year maximum to 10-40 years. Deaths that occur in the commission of a felony can usually be charged (depending on the state) as felony murder.
SO, why add special laws? Cause there are no laws to handle this particular case. And you don't want laws written so they can apply to other random situations that in hindsight oldgraybeard thinks are the same... that way lies arbitrary power in the hands of prosecutors and a lack of predictably.
I'm not going to get into hate crimes (which have a lot of arguments on both sides). Instead, I'm going to say there is a clear distinction in how you have to rehabilitate someone who: intentionally murders someone for profit (premeditated murder aka murder 1); partner shoots someone during a bank robbery (felony murder); kills someone in a fit of anger after an argument escalates to a shoving match escalates (regular murder aka murder 2); hits someone whlie driving recklessly (vehicular homicide); accidentally shoots someone while hunting (manslaughter) and accidentally shooting someone while hunting while drunk (negligent homicide.) Or maybe I got a few examples wrong, IANAL. But the point isn't to hurt someone because they killed someone. It's primarily to prevent future bad acts, by deterring them via punishment and via rehabilitation. So someone who knew when they woke up they were going to kill someone will get different deterrence and rehabilitation than someone who kills someone because they didn't take appropriate precautions to prevent that death.
He was unarmed, everyone admits that. One officer did shoot... although not a member of the SWAT team. The more trained SWAT members did not fire. And lastly, a hostage situation (or potential one) is definitely when I SWAT team should be used. It's not a problem with "every situation = SWAT", it's a problem that " 'Pranksters' can define the situation to require SWAT." If SWAT only responded to active shootouts between war heroes and terrorists, that would be what was reported as occurring.
Not only that, but encruption fights those features. Recording more data faster to the card is consisdered a feature (I need to store that higher resolution, extra dnamic range, more frames per second, etc.) Already some cameras require CF cards because SD isn't fast enough. Encryption will invariably slow down the write speed.
Nope, the old bosses were threatenable. Because any given taxi/driver can be replaced. Local governments could regulate them. Lyft and Uber are large enough to fight city hall. They can afford to lose all the revenue from a major US city for an indeterminate period to display credible threats to the others.
In other words, you think the competition for Amazon's second headquarters is a large company throwing its weight around./p.
Oh, I'm totally willing to say that Android and ChromeOS are good for the Linux ecosystem. You're quite right that it drives drivers (probably the most important aspect.). But that's not the topic of this thread. I was originally responding to someone who said "Android and ChromeOS are both Linux, therefore interchangable"
I'm imagining my next surfing/email/slashdot computer will be a Chromebook with a "real" distro on it. They seem to be driving the price down on those platforms pretty nicely.
Look, I'm not trying to dis Android. I'm just saying that it being based on Linux doesn't make it equivalent to Chrome OS, any more than OSX is equivalent to BSD or the ability to run Windows 95 in the browser of your Android device makes it a Windows machine.
They're not patenting either technology. They're patenting using them to prevent a smart speaker from responding. It's the difference (in law at least) between patenting "eating plants" and "eating XYZ to cure cancer"
Electric signals are almost ready to replace electric signals in tablets
Stupid reductionism is stupid. I cannot just run any Linux software on a tablet (e.g. GIMP). Being based on linux is no more interesting than being based on electricity.
So the actual pairings are 8/0, 7/1, 6/2, 5/3 and 4/0
Except, the actual pairings are 8/0, 7/1, 6/2, 5/3, 4/4. Therefore we know the wife (and the husband telling the story) each shook four hands, because only the husband didn't count as a duplicate.
They could charge you more if you had been on fewer dates/were a virgin. Discriminating prices based on age (within the working age population) is illegal, as is discriminating prices based on race or religion.
Senior discounts are okay because they are "retired persons" discounts that happen to be based on a rough heuristic. And it works cause it's hard for me to imagine a 66-year-old who works complaining, or a jury being sympathetic to a retired 40-year-old suing to save $1.
Slashdot Mirror
Not that I would recommend it, but if that was your plan today is a good day for it. Sure, the stock market is down 4.6%, but bitcoin is down 12.6%. So you get 9.4% more bitcoin per share (average share price) today compared to yesterday.
Not with Trump in the White House.
I think the abandonded use is trying to find a compromise between losing a fight to Disney every time Steamboat Willy is about to enter the public domain and every work having a 95+year copyright.
How does the fact that an abandoned property becomes valuable enough to restore affect whether it was abandoned in the first place. Maybe if people worried about the future use of their products, they wouldn't abandon them in the first place.
We have analogs for abandoning physical things. You don't get to change your mind once the situation changes.
For a mid-to-large company, that's fine. A small company won't even have one lawyer on-staff to start the vitriol. And, as an individual, it's hard for me to imagine anywhere near as complete a system.
As I said, a great system. I wonder if there's some way to supply it as a service to the general population.
Look, either the government can override your OS restrictions, in which case they have root access to your phone and don't need the app, or they cannot override your OS restrictions, and denying the permissions is enough.
The NFL auctions off the rights. NBC outbids ABC.
I remember our tech lead in 2003ish insisted on following MS's API and structure recommendations, which included warnings that certain calls and other aspects would be deprecated in the future. Our software worked perfectly in Vista. Many products by bigger companies failed with security ot other issues. By post-hoc fixing some of their issues, you could get them working in Vista. Win7 had the advantage of arriving after all those companies fixed their software. I'd imagine tht had far more to do with it than "MS pouring in resources".
I object to your "admin review" rule. Being guilt of anything else shouldn't in any way excuse police misconduct on an unrelated issue.
These laws are about clarifying that SWATing is not "phoning in a false police report" (which may be a misdemeanor in some areas) but a felony. Hence, it going from a 1 year maximum to 10-40 years. Deaths that occur in the commission of a felony can usually be charged (depending on the state) as felony murder.
SO, why add special laws? Cause there are no laws to handle this particular case. And you don't want laws written so they can apply to other random situations that in hindsight oldgraybeard thinks are the same... that way lies arbitrary power in the hands of prosecutors and a lack of predictably.
I'm not going to get into hate crimes (which have a lot of arguments on both sides). Instead, I'm going to say there is a clear distinction in how you have to rehabilitate someone who: intentionally murders someone for profit (premeditated murder aka murder 1); partner shoots someone during a bank robbery (felony murder); kills someone in a fit of anger after an argument escalates to a shoving match escalates (regular murder aka murder 2); hits someone whlie driving recklessly (vehicular homicide); accidentally shoots someone while hunting (manslaughter) and accidentally shooting someone while hunting while drunk (negligent homicide.) Or maybe I got a few examples wrong, IANAL. But the point isn't to hurt someone because they killed someone. It's primarily to prevent future bad acts, by deterring them via punishment and via rehabilitation. So someone who knew when they woke up they were going to kill someone will get different deterrence and rehabilitation than someone who kills someone because they didn't take appropriate precautions to prevent that death.
He was unarmed, everyone admits that. One officer did shoot... although not a member of the SWAT team. The more trained SWAT members did not fire. And lastly, a hostage situation (or potential one) is definitely when I SWAT team should be used. It's not a problem with "every situation = SWAT", it's a problem that " 'Pranksters' can define the situation to require SWAT." If SWAT only responded to active shootouts between war heroes and terrorists, that would be what was reported as occurring.
Leaving aside the legal costs, and the costs of the loaner laptops, that solution sounds pretty expensive. But very effective.
Not only that, but encruption fights those features. Recording more data faster to the card is consisdered a feature (I need to store that higher resolution, extra dnamic range, more frames per second, etc.) Already some cameras require CF cards because SD isn't fast enough. Encryption will invariably slow down the write speed.
Nope, the old bosses were threatenable. Because any given taxi/driver can be replaced. Local governments could regulate them. Lyft and Uber are large enough to fight city hall. They can afford to lose all the revenue from a major US city for an indeterminate period to display credible threats to the others.
In other words, you think the competition for Amazon's second headquarters is a large company throwing its weight around./p.
Oh, I'm totally willing to say that Android and ChromeOS are good for the Linux ecosystem. You're quite right that it drives drivers (probably the most important aspect.). But that's not the topic of this thread. I was originally responding to someone who said "Android and ChromeOS are both Linux, therefore interchangable"
I'm imagining my next surfing/email/slashdot computer will be a Chromebook with a "real" distro on it. They seem to be driving the price down on those platforms pretty nicely.
Both are bad. Adding a second gatekeeper just means two gatekeepers in my way. Let's by all means deal with upsteam monopolies as well!
It's Montana (leading the way) , NY and Cali as of now. I'd expect Washington State to follow soon.
Wow, a virtual machine! Tell me more!
Look, I'm not trying to dis Android. I'm just saying that it being based on Linux doesn't make it equivalent to Chrome OS, any more than OSX is equivalent to BSD or the ability to run Windows 95 in the browser of your Android device makes it a Windows machine.
They're not patenting either technology. They're patenting using them to prevent a smart speaker from responding. It's the difference (in law at least) between patenting "eating plants" and "eating XYZ to cure cancer"
Stupid reductionism is stupid. I cannot just run any Linux software on a tablet (e.g. GIMP). Being based on linux is no more interesting than being based on electricity.
See also, OSX != BSD
Except, the actual pairings are 8/0, 7/1, 6/2, 5/3, 4/4. Therefore we know the wife (and the husband telling the story) each shook four hands, because only the husband didn't count as a duplicate.
They could charge you more if you had been on fewer dates/were a virgin. Discriminating prices based on age (within the working age population) is illegal, as is discriminating prices based on race or religion.
Senior discounts are okay because they are "retired persons" discounts that happen to be based on a rough heuristic. And it works cause it's hard for me to imagine a 66-year-old who works complaining, or a jury being sympathetic to a retired 40-year-old suing to save $1.
That information is commercially available. Why wouldn't they use it?
It's based on veggies, but it could work just as well for meat: Link