Incorrect logic. The issue is copyright infringement, regardless of the method used. By your argument the element silicon is illegal because it's also used in the process. A judge can rule that *any* method of copyright infringement is illegal, but only within the bounds of the case, so in this example XML files used by Newzbin2 to assist copyright infringement are illegal, but not all XML files.
Not only that, but if I'd been part of the attack then I could be thrown into prison and registered as a paedophile because my computer had "accessed" the websites in question. The fact that you're accessing because you don't like it has nothing to do with it. Seriously. (I'm UK based)
Alternatively, you get your new battery pack and drive away without paying. When it requires replacement your card is debited to the original battery station depending on how many Joules it produced (meaning you pay more per mile if you drive more aggressively). The quality of the battery doesn't matter because you only pay for what you get. Obviously we'll need a minimum battery quality, but that kind of thing is easily covered by trading standards legislation, just as it is with liquid fuel.
I'll give you three from the last few years: Northern Rock, RBS, Lloyds TSB. They had to go to the government and explain they couldn't pay out if a large number of their customers wanted their money back.
1: That's just the US (although I agree there are similar things worldwide), in the UK we've now got several banks effectively owned by the taxpayer because their losses were too big for their insurance to cover, and the government had to buy them out to provide the capital to cover the banks losses and/or customer's money.
2: That only protects the first $250,000 per individual, per bank.
3: Insurance companies, even federal level ones, can also go bust.
Yes, the FDIC or equivalent helps, but it's very far from a guarantee that your money is safe.
You mean "guaranteed" that you'll get back what it says on your balance? Nope, you're not. It's entirely possible that you could go to take it out, and the bank just says "No, sorry, we haven't got it, we gambled with it and lost. Sorry!"
This is why we're in situation we are, the banks screwed up, lost the gambles, and if people get the money back it's because the governments cover it with money from the taxpayer, something I doubt they'll be doing again.
In short, yes, they can do what they want, and no, you can't have your money back. There is something "fucking stupid" going on, but it's not the guy/girl you were replying to.
Yeah, we might have to even go to the lengths of employing real people to do it. Completely impractical. I prefer the old "storing thousands of gallons of highly flammable fluids of several different sorts in an underground bunker" technique after all.
That's the point I think. You and I, we have a rough idea of hardware architecture and where everything should go, so we actually have difficulty in conceiving just how badly wrong it's possible to get it. Bill, on the other hand, is unfettered by our limitations, and is capable of things we can't conceive of. It's like being such a bad driver that you can make a car turn onto jelly. Most people can't work out how it's done, but for a small, elite band, it's not only possible, but likely.
Yup. You need a whole 19 digits to calculate the circumference of the observable universe to the resolution of one Planck Length. Of course, the Universe could be much bigger than just the observable bit, then we'd need more figures. If we need to use all of pi to define the circumference, then we're in an infinite universe.
Yup, question answered. There's never been a sign of life on the moon, but we went there anyway, it's not all about finding life. In fact, that might not even have much commercial value in the long run.
Fair enough, but bear in mind that I was suggesting full colour, real time video x-ray vision, without the problems of actually using x-rays. You're right though, you might want some sort of long-wavelength transmitter to get through metal or solid stone walls, wifi ain't up to the job. (Although on that note, my dad was stopped with a present in his bag at an airport in the 80s. The security guy was able to read the Victorinox logo. It's quite impressive.)
Yes. I was agreeing with you and backing up your commentary. Got your back bud.:) (Redundant, perhaps, but I reckon data gathered from internet fora would be much better if people agreed with each other just as much as they disagreed)
The ideas just go on - what about fitting it with sensors from a kinect too, so you get a 3D model with your photo. IR cameras too, motion sensors - hook a bunch of them into a network, scatter them around, and you could have an "x-ray vision" HUD that shows you what's going on through walls and ceilings.
Very, very clever indeed, I love this idea for the sheer simplicity, and I'll bet you can make the basic hardware for under $US500.
The whole point is that they're experimenting with wireless in safety critical systems. Now, they could do this by experimenting on jet airliners, or they could do it on something a little less "killing hundreds" safety critical.
They need some kind of safety critical system, and pushbike brakes seem like a good compromise.
If this is the same "opt-in" that BT applied to their FON system then everybody will be "automatically opted in". You can opt-out of their opt-in system, but being automatically opted-in. I did query how this was different to an "opt-out" system, but I'm clearly not smart enough to understand the difference.
Or skip a part and use tourists as probes. If a spaceship and science mission can be made relatively idiot-proof then I'm sure there'd be no shortage of willing volunteers to stick in the can, and they'd pay for the privilege.
All we need is something that can provide a sustained 1g acceleration. A bunch of medical problems go out of the window, and the crew will be able to traverse the galaxy in 12 years subjective time. Doesn't help the rest of us any, but it can be done. Yes, the engineering issues are quite big, but hey.
This techie type won't be recommending it because of the real name policy. How on earth can I advise them not to put personal information on the internet and at the same time recommend a system that requires your real name next to everything you do? Oh, and with reference to TFS, it has nothing to do with Facebook in my case at least, there's nothing to "go back to" because I've never used it.
So what happens when the (science educated) politicians find (scientific) evidence for, say, social benefits from legalising marijuana? The voters won't like it, vote the (scientifically educated) politicians out and we're back to square one with the addition of a spanking for the politicians that dared listen to data. Democracy doesn't deal in facts and evidence, it's a popularity contest. If you want a scientific leadership in a democracy then you need a scientifically educated populous to vote them in and keep them there, it's all about educating the people to find the right politicians.
I wonder where most of the technology is driven, by large scale commercial operations like Boeing etc, or the smaller scale university departments and independent efforts. Most of the new Dreamliner "concepts" like the composite materials are something sport gliders have been pioneering for decades. Hopefully we'll see some trickle-up from this, or at least encourage some good engineering.
I've always read it as an unusually realistic view on killing people, at least as far as a US based TV drama goes. I'd read the statement along the lines of "I will kill people if I have to defend myself, but it'll be when the other person is directly threatening to kill me."
It ties in quite nicely with the UK's "reasonable force" laws. If you kill another person then they need to be trying to kill you, ideally armed, and giving you no other option (eg running away). If somebody is right in front of you, armed, and trying to kill you then you can do whatever you need to to protect yourself. If you hit them over the head and they die, that's not a problem. Hit them over the head, wait for them to fall over unconcious, and then kill them and it's considered murder.
So, to summarise, UK law very roughly says that if you kill somebody they better be facing you, awake, and armed. Then it's self defence and you're the good guy.
Slashdot Mirror
Incorrect logic. The issue is copyright infringement, regardless of the method used. By your argument the element silicon is illegal because it's also used in the process. A judge can rule that *any* method of copyright infringement is illegal, but only within the bounds of the case, so in this example XML files used by Newzbin2 to assist copyright infringement are illegal, but not all XML files.
Not only that, but if I'd been part of the attack then I could be thrown into prison and registered as a paedophile because my computer had "accessed" the websites in question. The fact that you're accessing because you don't like it has nothing to do with it. Seriously. (I'm UK based)
Alternatively, you get your new battery pack and drive away without paying. When it requires replacement your card is debited to the original battery station depending on how many Joules it produced (meaning you pay more per mile if you drive more aggressively). The quality of the battery doesn't matter because you only pay for what you get. Obviously we'll need a minimum battery quality, but that kind of thing is easily covered by trading standards legislation, just as it is with liquid fuel.
I'll give you three from the last few years: Northern Rock, RBS, Lloyds TSB. They had to go to the government and explain they couldn't pay out if a large number of their customers wanted their money back.
1: That's just the US (although I agree there are similar things worldwide), in the UK we've now got several banks effectively owned by the taxpayer because their losses were too big for their insurance to cover, and the government had to buy them out to provide the capital to cover the banks losses and/or customer's money.
2: That only protects the first $250,000 per individual, per bank.
3: Insurance companies, even federal level ones, can also go bust.
Yes, the FDIC or equivalent helps, but it's very far from a guarantee that your money is safe.
You mean "guaranteed" that you'll get back what it says on your balance? Nope, you're not. It's entirely possible that you could go to take it out, and the bank just says "No, sorry, we haven't got it, we gambled with it and lost. Sorry!"
This is why we're in situation we are, the banks screwed up, lost the gambles, and if people get the money back it's because the governments cover it with money from the taxpayer, something I doubt they'll be doing again.
In short, yes, they can do what they want, and no, you can't have your money back. There is something "fucking stupid" going on, but it's not the guy/girl you were replying to.
Yeah, we might have to even go to the lengths of employing real people to do it. Completely impractical. I prefer the old "storing thousands of gallons of highly flammable fluids of several different sorts in an underground bunker" technique after all.
"Thank you for your empty battery. Here's a full one. That'll be x-dollars. Thank you and have a nice day"
Doesn't seem all that long to me.
That's the point I think. You and I, we have a rough idea of hardware architecture and where everything should go, so we actually have difficulty in conceiving just how badly wrong it's possible to get it. Bill, on the other hand, is unfettered by our limitations, and is capable of things we can't conceive of. It's like being such a bad driver that you can make a car turn onto jelly. Most people can't work out how it's done, but for a small, elite band, it's not only possible, but likely.
Yup. You need a whole 19 digits to calculate the circumference of the observable universe to the resolution of one Planck Length. Of course, the Universe could be much bigger than just the observable bit, then we'd need more figures. If we need to use all of pi to define the circumference, then we're in an infinite universe.
Agreed. If this problem existed then the GPS and satnav industries wouldn't exist because it wouldn't work.
Yup, question answered. There's never been a sign of life on the moon, but we went there anyway, it's not all about finding life. In fact, that might not even have much commercial value in the long run.
Fair enough, but bear in mind that I was suggesting full colour, real time video x-ray vision, without the problems of actually using x-rays. You're right though, you might want some sort of long-wavelength transmitter to get through metal or solid stone walls, wifi ain't up to the job.
(Although on that note, my dad was stopped with a present in his bag at an airport in the 80s. The security guy was able to read the Victorinox logo. It's quite impressive.)
Yes. I was agreeing with you and backing up your commentary. Got your back bud. :) (Redundant, perhaps, but I reckon data gathered from internet fora would be much better if people agreed with each other just as much as they disagreed)
+1
The ideas just go on - what about fitting it with sensors from a kinect too, so you get a 3D model with your photo. IR cameras too, motion sensors - hook a bunch of them into a network, scatter them around, and you could have an "x-ray vision" HUD that shows you what's going on through walls and ceilings.
Very, very clever indeed, I love this idea for the sheer simplicity, and I'll bet you can make the basic hardware for under $US500.
The whole point is that they're experimenting with wireless in safety critical systems. Now, they could do this by experimenting on jet airliners, or they could do it on something a little less "killing hundreds" safety critical.
They need some kind of safety critical system, and pushbike brakes seem like a good compromise.
Well, they were on the wrong side at least. OP may be thinking of shirts, calling Godwin.
If this is the same "opt-in" that BT applied to their FON system then everybody will be "automatically opted in". You can opt-out of their opt-in system, but being automatically opted-in. I did query how this was different to an "opt-out" system, but I'm clearly not smart enough to understand the difference.
Or skip a part and use tourists as probes. If a spaceship and science mission can be made relatively idiot-proof then I'm sure there'd be no shortage of willing volunteers to stick in the can, and they'd pay for the privilege.
All we need is something that can provide a sustained 1g acceleration. A bunch of medical problems go out of the window, and the crew will be able to traverse the galaxy in 12 years subjective time. Doesn't help the rest of us any, but it can be done. Yes, the engineering issues are quite big, but hey.
This techie type won't be recommending it because of the real name policy. How on earth can I advise them not to put personal information on the internet and at the same time recommend a system that requires your real name next to everything you do? Oh, and with reference to TFS, it has nothing to do with Facebook in my case at least, there's nothing to "go back to" because I've never used it.
"And when we find Him, Sister Godwinson, you'll be right and we'll be satisfied." -Me
So what happens when the (science educated) politicians find (scientific) evidence for, say, social benefits from legalising marijuana? The voters won't like it, vote the (scientifically educated) politicians out and we're back to square one with the addition of a spanking for the politicians that dared listen to data. Democracy doesn't deal in facts and evidence, it's a popularity contest. If you want a scientific leadership in a democracy then you need a scientifically educated populous to vote them in and keep them there, it's all about educating the people to find the right politicians.
I wonder where most of the technology is driven, by large scale commercial operations like Boeing etc, or the smaller scale university departments and independent efforts. Most of the new Dreamliner "concepts" like the composite materials are something sport gliders have been pioneering for decades. Hopefully we'll see some trickle-up from this, or at least encourage some good engineering.
I've always read it as an unusually realistic view on killing people, at least as far as a US based TV drama goes. I'd read the statement along the lines of "I will kill people if I have to defend myself, but it'll be when the other person is directly threatening to kill me."
It ties in quite nicely with the UK's "reasonable force" laws. If you kill another person then they need to be trying to kill you, ideally armed, and giving you no other option (eg running away). If somebody is right in front of you, armed, and trying to kill you then you can do whatever you need to to protect yourself. If you hit them over the head and they die, that's not a problem. Hit them over the head, wait for them to fall over unconcious, and then kill them and it's considered murder.
So, to summarise, UK law very roughly says that if you kill somebody they better be facing you, awake, and armed. Then it's self defence and you're the good guy.