So let me get this straight... You spend a dollar trying to improve your business process. It doesn't work out. So you're out a dollar. I get it. But then you're out a further $10 because if it HAD worked out, that's what you WOULD have saved. Puh-lease. That's assuming your idea was worth a fuck. NOT ALL IDEAS ARE.
I can easily prove that you personally have lost millions of dollars because there were plenty of things you COULD have done to earn those millions. Why didn't you start a search engine? Why didn't you write the twitter application? Not skilled enough? Heck, you should have bought that winning lottery ticket! And while we're at it, why did you waste your money on fixing your car when it just got wrecked a month later?
My god, you've cost yourself millions of dollars due to your incompetence!
Spend a little time as a property owner that's tired of bums pissing in the corners in your property you're going to try to show the next morning, or what happens more often, they light fires inside anyway despite of the heat, and burn the place down.
Really? THAT'S what happens more often? So you're telling us that not only have bums burned down your buildings, but they do it SO OFTEN that you can tell us it's the more common result?
Forgive me if I call you a FUCKING LIAR. I propose that no building you own has been burned down. Instead, you are a property owner who uses the FEAR of a bum burning down your buildings to justify the draconian property security that you favor.
I think I'll tell my parishoners to go piss on your property. On the bright side, it should make it harder to burn.
Notice the link is now broken? Here's the way it now works:
Company asshole #1: Let's put up a forum where customers can discuss our product.
Company asshole #2: It's working great, they're discussing our product!
Company asshole #1: Hey, they're saying some bad things! Let's pull down those postings.
And if you setup your own website to discuss their product, they hit you with a DCMA take-down because you mentioned their name which is a trademark you can't use.
Fuck facebook. Not for privacy bullshit, but rather for just being dicks.
Let's say that low-demand text will not be accessed very often. In fact, let's say a person wants the information only once every 20 years.
A book will still be on your shelf in 20 years. Your electronic version, while still physically present, cannot be accessed in 20 years because the format of the storage medium has become obsolete.
digital versions of things will last much longer than anything physical
Then why can I still read the Illiad, while the term paper I wrote as a college freshman and stored on an 8" floppy is beyond reach?
One is 3000 years old, the other 30 years old. But one is MUCH less likely to ever be read again. One has a smaller audience, true, but I would like to read both but CANNOT.
A book offers permanence. Books are created so the only infrastructure required to receive the information within is your brain. And how can you get rid of books authorities no longer like? Well, because of the light infrastructure requirements, you CAN'T. No book burning has ever deleted an entire work from the culture.
But if a corporation decides to "burn" an e-reader book, can they? They sure CAN! And the book will be gone with no chance of ever discovering an unburnt copy.
Sorry, no. The function I want is PERMANENCE. That cannot be built into an e-reader.
Nobody is going to pratically use this device for random checking of homes.
Well, as long as YOU say they won't, I guess we have nothing to worry about. Whew, thanks for providing that iron-clad guarantee that this will not be abused (unlike every other spy device ever constructed by anyone, anywhere).
My walls are between 6 to 8 inches of solid soft wood with no hollows. I live in a log cabin made from balsam. How well does a half foot of solid wood block this tech? The cabin also has small (1' x 3') and few windows because it is cold and dark here.
I also wonder how well my walls would stop an accidental rifle bullet from 100 meters (closer and you can see the house), as I hear hunters in the woods this time of year.
The employee specifically said they copied the Mac's "look and feel" which is a determining factor for infringement lawsuits. So as far as lawyers are concerned, he basically said "We stole some of Apple's work."
They ain't trying to save face. They are trying to save a lawsuit loss (i.e., money).
The most fuel-efficient method of cresting a hill is to be going slowest at the top, fastest at the bottom. Real world data will reveal that most people are going fastest at the top, slowest at the bottom.
This is what makes regenerative braking work out for most people. However, I used to regularly commute 46 miles touching my brakes only once: when parking in the lot at my destination. How much would regenerative braking have helped me?
Regenerative braking only works when you drive like an ass. And yes, I understand that having other cars on the road (unlike my old commute) forces you to drive like an ass.
Yeah, why would you think warrants are required for the government to listen in on your conversations?
The fact that they can "monitor network traffic" and still have people ask what could possibly require a warrant is the real news here. Maybe DARPA is just trying to see if people no longer care if their information is wiretapped by the government. Responses like above should provide plenty of comfort--no one gives a good god damn.
Hey, I have home automation: My heat is automatically turned down when no one is home because there's no one there to put more logs into the woodstove. This has worked great since 1979.
On a serious note, I think most automation projects are designed beautifully but are not used as designed because it turns out they weren't really needed. This is fine for a hobby but it don't make a market.
If you're thinking "I need some automation." maybe you should instead be thinking "I have way too much shit to take care of." If you're thinking "I need to protect my crap." maybe you should instead be thinking "Why do I have this crap?" Buying "crap babysitters" is always going to be more expensive than not owning crap that needs babysitting.
If you are seriously considering having to call your oven to tell it you're going to be late from work, you have all the disadvantages of a wife without the advantages. WTF?
The government didn't renege on the promise of gold for dollars, they just privatized the system. Take your US dollars to a private gold seller and he will exchange some gold for each of those green rectangles.
Of course, the rate of exchange has been privatized as well.
shouldn't the net emissions be the goal, rather than mandating specific technologies?
Are you new to this country?
The lobbyist that got this written (or wrote it himself) did not work for society, he worked for a specialty glass corporation. Why would he want rules for the betterment of society when instead he could have rules for the betterment of his patron? And of course, he'll still use the betterment of society as his argument.
I can't think of a good way to test for those who can actually not be distracted by a phone
Really? You can't?
Because researchers have put people into driving simulators and had them drive while various distractions occurred then watched for mistakes. Turns out they make a lot more mistakes when talking on the phone than when listening to the radio.
How they stumbled upon this super-sophisticated experimental methodology, I'll never know! They must be geniuses.
"An unarmed man can only flee from evil, and evil is not overcome by fleeing from it." Col. Jeff Cooper
Jeff Cooper obviously never met Ghandi or Martin Luther King, Jr. Both overcame evil without bullets.
It may not be easy, and you don't get that satisfying Hollywood-type revenge, but most civilization-level improvements come not from bullets, but from ideas.
I used to work for Michael S. Perlis (President of Playboy Publishing Group for many years). Before Playboy, he ran the marketing department for a local ski resort. Believe it or not, I had to dress as a bunny for him! True story.
You don't get to choose which camera you see each session. In fact, the location is 'secret' (though you may be able to figure it out). Single person surveillance won't work.
This never was an ad. It was instead an artist's fashion industry critique.
Given that, Ralph wanted to set the record straight and tell people "Don't put my name on that, it has nothing to do with my company." And to stem some of the damage, maybe force takedowns on the grounds that Ralph's TRADEMARK is on it in an unauthorized use.
Perhaps ignoring it would be wiser, but doesn't he get to decide that his name can't be used in this manner (going as it does against his business interests)?
I'm not affiliated with RL and I hate thin women (too much boring conversation about dieting plus they never smile), but this one is not as cut and dried as some would believe.
Any gifts were obviously personal and the businesses were not involved (though they are sole proprietorships so that's fuzzy already). But how will it play out? Well I guess we're going to find out how the law works in practice because I can tell you right now my wife will neither remove the link, nor post a disclaimer.
Good luck with that, FTC! I pity the agent who has to deal with her over this issue. It'll be the most painful 11 grand ever collected.
ANY statement of endorsement in print, media, or on the web, where ANY form of payment, discount, freebie, etc was given, with or without a request for a favorablke posting, requires disclosure
My wife's gardening website includes a link to her friend's wedding bouquet service with language indicating my wife's endorsement.
While she was not paid for that link, they have known each other for 50 years. So many, many free gifts have been exchanged in that time. Even money has probably changed hands between them at some time during their association.
Is a disclaimer required on her site? Because if so, then this is a win for the mega corporations. If I can't recommend my friend's service, then only massive corporations will get any advertising at all.
Slashdot Mirror
So let me get this straight... You spend a dollar trying to improve your business process. It doesn't work out. So you're out a dollar. I get it. But then you're out a further $10 because if it HAD worked out, that's what you WOULD have saved. Puh-lease. That's assuming your idea was worth a fuck. NOT ALL IDEAS ARE.
I can easily prove that you personally have lost millions of dollars because there were plenty of things you COULD have done to earn those millions. Why didn't you start a search engine? Why didn't you write the twitter application? Not skilled enough? Heck, you should have bought that winning lottery ticket! And while we're at it, why did you waste your money on fixing your car when it just got wrecked a month later?
My god, you've cost yourself millions of dollars due to your incompetence!
Spend a little time as a property owner that's tired of bums pissing in the corners in your property you're going to try to show the next morning, or what happens more often, they light fires inside anyway despite of the heat, and burn the place down.
Really? THAT'S what happens more often? So you're telling us that not only have bums burned down your buildings, but they do it SO OFTEN that you can tell us it's the more common result?
Forgive me if I call you a FUCKING LIAR. I propose that no building you own has been burned down. Instead, you are a property owner who uses the FEAR of a bum burning down your buildings to justify the draconian property security that you favor.
I think I'll tell my parishoners to go piss on your property. On the bright side, it should make it harder to burn.
Notice the link is now broken? Here's the way it now works:
Company asshole #1: Let's put up a forum where customers can discuss our product.
Company asshole #2: It's working great, they're discussing our product!
Company asshole #1: Hey, they're saying some bad things! Let's pull down those postings.
And if you setup your own website to discuss their product, they hit you with a DCMA take-down because you mentioned their name which is a trademark you can't use.
Fuck facebook. Not for privacy bullshit, but rather for just being dicks.
Let's say that low-demand text will not be accessed very often. In fact, let's say a person wants the information only once every 20 years.
A book will still be on your shelf in 20 years. Your electronic version, while still physically present, cannot be accessed in 20 years because the format of the storage medium has become obsolete.
digital versions of things will last much longer than anything physical
Then why can I still read the Illiad, while the term paper I wrote as a college freshman and stored on an 8" floppy is beyond reach?
One is 3000 years old, the other 30 years old. But one is MUCH less likely to ever be read again. One has a smaller audience, true, but I would like to read both but CANNOT.
A book offers permanence. Books are created so the only infrastructure required to receive the information within is your brain. And how can you get rid of books authorities no longer like? Well, because of the light infrastructure requirements, you CAN'T. No book burning has ever deleted an entire work from the culture.
But if a corporation decides to "burn" an e-reader book, can they? They sure CAN! And the book will be gone with no chance of ever discovering an unburnt copy.
Sorry, no. The function I want is PERMANENCE. That cannot be built into an e-reader.
Nobody is going to pratically use this device for random checking of homes.
Well, as long as YOU say they won't, I guess we have nothing to worry about. Whew, thanks for providing that iron-clad guarantee that this will not be abused (unlike every other spy device ever constructed by anyone, anywhere).
My walls are between 6 to 8 inches of solid soft wood with no hollows. I live in a log cabin made from balsam. How well does a half foot of solid wood block this tech? The cabin also has small (1' x 3') and few windows because it is cold and dark here.
I also wonder how well my walls would stop an accidental rifle bullet from 100 meters (closer and you can see the house), as I hear hunters in the woods this time of year.
The employee specifically said they copied the Mac's "look and feel" which is a determining factor for infringement lawsuits. So as far as lawyers are concerned, he basically said "We stole some of Apple's work."
They ain't trying to save face. They are trying to save a lawsuit loss (i.e., money).
The Veyron has 1001 horsepower. It can accelerate from 0 to 400k/h in 50 seconds. But it can decelerate from 400k/h to 0 in 10 seconds.
Correctly functioning brakes are ALWAYS more powerful than the engine.
The most fuel-efficient method of cresting a hill is to be going slowest at the top, fastest at the bottom. Real world data will reveal that most people are going fastest at the top, slowest at the bottom.
This is what makes regenerative braking work out for most people. However, I used to regularly commute 46 miles touching my brakes only once: when parking in the lot at my destination. How much would regenerative braking have helped me?
Regenerative braking only works when you drive like an ass. And yes, I understand that having other cars on the road (unlike my old commute) forces you to drive like an ass.
This is my hypothesis as well.
Yeah, why would you think warrants are required for the government to listen in on your conversations?
The fact that they can "monitor network traffic" and still have people ask what could possibly require a warrant is the real news here. Maybe DARPA is just trying to see if people no longer care if their information is wiretapped by the government. Responses like above should provide plenty of comfort--no one gives a good god damn.
Hey, I have home automation: My heat is automatically turned down when no one is home because there's no one there to put more logs into the woodstove. This has worked great since 1979.
On a serious note, I think most automation projects are designed beautifully but are not used as designed because it turns out they weren't really needed. This is fine for a hobby but it don't make a market.
If you're thinking "I need some automation." maybe you should instead be thinking "I have way too much shit to take care of." If you're thinking "I need to protect my crap." maybe you should instead be thinking "Why do I have this crap?" Buying "crap babysitters" is always going to be more expensive than not owning crap that needs babysitting.
If you are seriously considering having to call your oven to tell it you're going to be late from work, you have all the disadvantages of a wife without the advantages. WTF?
The government didn't renege on the promise of gold for dollars, they just privatized the system. Take your US dollars to a private gold seller and he will exchange some gold for each of those green rectangles.
Of course, the rate of exchange has been privatized as well.
In 2025, there will be high-frequency Really Efficient Diode Lasers, which will go by the acronym RED-Ray.
shouldn't the net emissions be the goal, rather than mandating specific technologies?
Are you new to this country?
The lobbyist that got this written (or wrote it himself) did not work for society, he worked for a specialty glass corporation. Why would he want rules for the betterment of society when instead he could have rules for the betterment of his patron? And of course, he'll still use the betterment of society as his argument.
I can't think of a good way to test for those who can actually not be distracted by a phone
Really? You can't?
Because researchers have put people into driving simulators and had them drive while various distractions occurred then watched for mistakes. Turns out they make a lot more mistakes when talking on the phone than when listening to the radio.
How they stumbled upon this super-sophisticated experimental methodology, I'll never know! They must be geniuses.
"An unarmed man can only flee from evil, and evil is not overcome by fleeing from it." Col. Jeff Cooper
Jeff Cooper obviously never met Ghandi or Martin Luther King, Jr. Both overcame evil without bullets.
It may not be easy, and you don't get that satisfying Hollywood-type revenge, but most civilization-level improvements come not from bullets, but from ideas.
I used to work for Michael S. Perlis (President of Playboy Publishing Group for many years). Before Playboy, he ran the marketing department for a local ski resort. Believe it or not, I had to dress as a bunny for him! True story.
You don't get to choose which camera you see each session. In fact, the location is 'secret' (though you may be able to figure it out). Single person surveillance won't work.
From TFA: Three false positives and you are banned from the game.
This never was an ad. It was instead an artist's fashion industry critique.
Given that, Ralph wanted to set the record straight and tell people "Don't put my name on that, it has nothing to do with my company." And to stem some of the damage, maybe force takedowns on the grounds that Ralph's TRADEMARK is on it in an unauthorized use.
Perhaps ignoring it would be wiser, but doesn't he get to decide that his name can't be used in this manner (going as it does against his business interests)?
I'm not affiliated with RL and I hate thin women (too much boring conversation about dieting plus they never smile), but this one is not as cut and dried as some would believe.
Any gifts were obviously personal and the businesses were not involved (though they are sole proprietorships so that's fuzzy already). But how will it play out? Well I guess we're going to find out how the law works in practice because I can tell you right now my wife will neither remove the link, nor post a disclaimer.
Good luck with that, FTC! I pity the agent who has to deal with her over this issue. It'll be the most painful 11 grand ever collected.
ANY statement of endorsement in print, media, or on the web, where ANY form of payment, discount, freebie, etc was given, with or without a request for a favorablke posting, requires disclosure
My wife's gardening website includes a link to her friend's wedding bouquet service with language indicating my wife's endorsement.
While she was not paid for that link, they have known each other for 50 years. So many, many free gifts have been exchanged in that time. Even money has probably changed hands between them at some time during their association.
Is a disclaimer required on her site? Because if so, then this is a win for the mega corporations. If I can't recommend my friend's service, then only massive corporations will get any advertising at all.