Federal judges cannot be removed from court once they are appointed, as Article III explicitly prohibits the legislative and executive branches from doing those kinds of shenanigans. ----
24 hours would be all right... except, you know, that the mail could be delivered 48 hours after the judge's ruling.
Also, you have to remember that whomever has to make the appeal needs to balance their options. They need to consider whether shelling out a non-negligible amount of cash makes sense. This usually involves consultations with lawyers to try to find any potential holes in the ruling. Now, if your attorney answers on the middle of the night, then it could probably be feasible. But most attorneys I've heard of have multiple cases, have appointments to keep, and/or need some sleep.
Is a month too long? Perhaps. But 24 hours is absurd. ----
You don't have to say that you can't do this, when it is already being done. My university campus has 5x the amount of students Duke has, and for the sake of argument, let's say that 20,000 of them have laptops. If you log in from one of the "shared" sites, anyone who enters the campus can access the Internet via guess access, or by logging into a separate subnet with a 600-minute session. If you are registered to the university, be it as a student or staff, and you want to log in from another "private" wi-fi site, it automatically forwards all HTTP requests to a DHCP registration/authentication site. In this site, you must register your MAC address (and have to re-register every semester) via the automatic detection wizard, and also have to accept a series of security tests to be run, to avoid blatant security holes. If you pass the tests, your MAC is stored in the database, along with your user Id. If you have already registered, you can bypass the tests, and get assigned an IP address automatically.
Heck, just the security tests makes it a good idea.
"video editing" as a market for apples? geez, come on. you do video editing on a freaking mac ?! i would prefer windows or linux any day [video software availability set aside]. i mean, sheesh, i couldn't think of doing video editing on a system that doesn't have a right mouse button or which has cases that aren't easily expandable to have 5 or 10 DVD drives. (and don't tell me i can put a mouse in that has N>1 buttons on a mac. tell me instead why that isn't the default choice and why i have to always purchase additional stuff to get what i want on macs.) and please tell me why there is an eject button on the keyboard, which is perfectly ambiguous in the case where you have multiple drives to read from. no thanks, i don't think this is my type of video editing system. Simply put, you have no idea what you are talking about. When someone who works in television broadcasting is salivating over my lowly iMac due to its video editing tools, and wishing her company would cough up the money to buy Mac Pros, your argument is simply not believable.
Also, if you need to buy anything to get your mouse to right-click on a Mac, you were scammed. It took me less than a minute to figure out how to configure my Mighty Mouse on a new iMac, even when I had never used Mac OS X before. It simply is the same as in Windows: you click on System Preferences (Control Panel) -> Keyboard and Mouse -> click on the Mouse tab, then assign the right button to the "Secondary button". Failing that, there's always Ctrl+Click. You can always right-click on the drive you want to eject and click "eject" in the pop-up menu. Your opinion that Mac OS X is inferior because it does things differently than you wish them to do is exactly opposite to your primary argument.
heh! so he did have a sneaky strategy! usually you'd buy a new battery and snap it in yourself. i said apple had a sneaky tactic to make you buy their battery and tech support. but no, it was even more sneaky! they now want you to buy a whole NEW DEVICE! No one I know actually buys a battery for any mobile device - they just buy a brand-new device anyways. By the time batteries begin to fail, keys are not working, or the device's technology is obsolete. Besides, with its sticker price, do you seriously believe someone is going to throw an iPhone to a landfill, when a replacement battery costs a fraction of its original purchase price? No. More likely, iPhone 2G will be released by then, and Apple will offer an "upgrade" for a fee. It's not a conspiracy, it's business.
"used only with" is a stupid way to design hardware, especially a music player. hardware should be as transparent to the user as possible, i.e. drag files into the thing on any of 3 OSes instead of ever having to install software. the installing of music library management software should be OPTIONAL by default, and otherwise, it should act like a thumbdrive, playing any mp3 or ogg it finds on the device. that's the most transparent way it can be, and it's the way a lot of non-apple music players are. That would be true if iPod + iTunes's business strategy were not to blur the distinction between software library management and hardware. However, when the main selling point of the iPod is that the user doesn't have to do that, and that the computer will do it for him, the difference between both is negligible. You still haven't explained why installing iTunes "should" be optional. Is it just because you say so? Again, if you don't like doing a thing a particular way, you don't have to do it. There is no need for theological-level pontification, particularly when the company you're yelling at is simply using a different paradigm from yours.
Ok, if I need to pay Microsoft to play a recording, and Microsoft gives a portion of its profits to the artist/RIAA/affiliate... does it mean that my copy of the recording is now legal? After all, I'm paying for the usage rights for that file to its "owner".
Also, isn't there something in the US Code against profiting from illegal goods? You could make an argument that pirated music is an illegal good, so Microsoft could be opening a huge can of worms against itself. Just imagine: RIAA v. Microsoft in a court one of these days...
It is actually quite easy: Sony underestimated the common parent.
When an 8-year old goes and asks his parents for a $600 machine that is predominantly going to be used to play FPS games, guess what is the parents' response? "Hell no." Or, since it is an 8-year old, they'll say, "Honey, didn't you say you wanted a bicycle?"
Let's face it: both the 360 and the PS3 are taking a beating by the Wii due to their focus demographic. While the ordinary Slashdot nerd is in the mind of Sony and Microsoft, Nintendo is betting the house on selling their consoles to middle-class, budget-conscious, family-values America. The best selling point of the 360 is Halo 3.141592653...; would you give a blood-bath game to a child? Many parents wouldn't. The PS3 has essentially the same lineup of games, and that's why they're both selling less than the Wii combined. The most "mature" popular game on the Wii is Zelda: Twilight Princess, which is not necessarily offensive to many parents in this country. The Wii also holds the advantage in the "fat-ass" arena, as it encourages children to move; while a kid may not consider that peculiarly important, a parent certainly does.
Then, there's the whole issue about the price. No matter what you say, the law of demand from basic economics states that the quantity demanded of a product will decrease with increasing price, as the number of those who are willing and able to buy simply diminishes with more price. Combine that with the unavailability of a "knockout" PS3 game and the uncertainty over Blue-Ray, and you'll end up asking yourself why anyone would want to buy a PS3, instead of a 360 (for the power gamers) or a Wii (for anyone else).
Also I simply
don't want someone making money off my work and GPL prevents that. Then stop using the GPL immediately, as the GPL allows commercial reuse.
Back to the subject at hand: Even if the iPhone had GPL'd software, it means nothing. Apple does not need to open the iPhone/OS X API; all they need to do is to point to a source repository somewhere on the net. In fact, if they did not modify the source code at all, they only need to point to your repo to satisfy the GPL requirements. The GPL source redistribution clauses are only triggered when you are redistributing modified software.
Actually, if you go higher up in the atmosphere, the value of small g does decrease, as the distance between you and the Earth increases. What you can't change is Big G, the universal gravitational constant.
And yeah, I did realize I wrote "weight" instead of the proper term, "mass", but then again, this is Slashdot.
Of course, having the wings be flexible is a good thing, but the real important part here is that they are made of carbon fiber. Carbon fiber is much less dense than metal, which reduces the weight of the plane. If the surface area of the wings is held constant, then fuel consumption can be reduced significantly, as the downward pull of gravity is shrunk as well.
Not really. They don't get to pick which version of an article sticks, and are usually reverted. We've had government agencies edit before, but usually role accounts don't fare so well.
Academia and government are going to take over wikipedia from within, by this model, and while this violates the fundamental ideal of wikipedia, it will improve the content vastly. Wikipedia admin speaking here: No, it doesn't violate the fundamental ideas of Wikipedia, and that is a very common misconception. Wikipedia is the encyclopedia that anyone can edit: Your congressman or the guy who is tapping your phone at the NSA are included in "anyone" as well. Wikipedia is the encyclopedia that anyone can edit, but it is also the encyclopedia in which anyone can challenge your edits, per the Verifiability policy. It is also the encyclopedia in which anyone can revert your edits if you do not cite them adequately, and it is also the encyclopedia that can refuse your privilege to edit if you blatantly refuse to state the source of your edits (as Wikipedia administrators have no idea whether what you are doing is sneaky vandalism).
Wikipedia, particularly the English Wikipedia, has been very source-oriented for a while now. You can see this in newer articles, for example, the article on the Virginia Tech massacre. Older articles need to catch up, but are getting there. There is also a built-in peer-reviewing system, the Featured article process, and an emerging quality assessment scale.
I wonder in which environment this is going to be deployed. If the vast majority of electronics say in TFM that they should not be "operated in temperatures exceeding 104 F (40 C)," or a similar number, then I just wonder how they are going to survive in the Imperial Valley region, which is essentially a part of the Mohave desert. The other day, it reached 115 F in the shade, and if you put these machines in direct sunlight, they would require cooling systems that would make them prohibitibly expensive. It will probably remain cheaper to keep hiring the dude that crossed the border 200 feet from my home in the Mexican side of the fence...
There's slightly more to this than meets the eye. They don't own your son's likeness, but what they do own is the creative elements in the photography. They own the particular arrangements of backgrounds, illumination, props, negative space, and such. It requires considerable skill in knowing how to make a picture pretty; I can try taking a picture of your son, but it would be nowhere even close in quality, because I don't know how to put all the creative elements together to make an appealing picture. Hence the copyright.
As it has been pointed out before, the shuttle can only carry seven astronauts. It isn't like you can just put the extra ones on the cargo bay and bring them home "on the back of the pick-up truck" - the STS comes into Earth's atmosphere at Mach 25, and performs a series of rolls akin to driving on a dirt road. Only that at Mach 25, the bumps that you feel when driving on the dirt road are life-threatening, so you need to properly secure all astronauts or cosmonauts for the penetration of Earth's atmosphere. Hence the big fuss about STS-125.
If I were a member of the ISS crew, I'd be happy if I had a spare Soyuz capsule docked somewhere nearby.
Slashdot Mirror
Not in a good long while.
Federal judges cannot be removed from court once they are appointed, as Article III explicitly prohibits the legislative and executive branches from doing those kinds of shenanigans.
----
~~~~
24 hours would be all right... except, you know, that the mail could be delivered 48 hours after the judge's ruling.
Also, you have to remember that whomever has to make the appeal needs to balance their options. They need to consider whether shelling out a non-negligible amount of cash makes sense. This usually involves consultations with lawyers to try to find any potential holes in the ruling. Now, if your attorney answers on the middle of the night, then it could probably be feasible. But most attorneys I've heard of have multiple cases, have appointments to keep, and/or need some sleep.
Is a month too long? Perhaps. But 24 hours is absurd.
----
~~~~
Dude, WP:1.0 wants YOU.
Two and a half years old, to be exact.
You don't have to say that you can't do this, when it is already being done. My university campus has 5x the amount of students Duke has, and for the sake of argument, let's say that 20,000 of them have laptops. If you log in from one of the "shared" sites, anyone who enters the campus can access the Internet via guess access, or by logging into a separate subnet with a 600-minute session. If you are registered to the university, be it as a student or staff, and you want to log in from another "private" wi-fi site, it automatically forwards all HTTP requests to a DHCP registration/authentication site. In this site, you must register your MAC address (and have to re-register every semester) via the automatic detection wizard, and also have to accept a series of security tests to be run, to avoid blatant security holes. If you pass the tests, your MAC is stored in the database, along with your user Id. If you have already registered, you can bypass the tests, and get assigned an IP address automatically.
Heck, just the security tests makes it a good idea.
So I guess that's how God disposes of the kittens doomed to die from global masturbation.
Ok, if I need to pay Microsoft to play a recording, and Microsoft gives a portion of its profits to the artist/RIAA/affiliate... does it mean that my copy of the recording is now legal? After all, I'm paying for the usage rights for that file to its "owner".
Also, isn't there something in the US Code against profiting from illegal goods? You could make an argument that pirated music is an illegal good, so Microsoft could be opening a huge can of worms against itself. Just imagine: RIAA v. Microsoft in a court one of these days...
~~~~
It is actually quite easy: Sony underestimated the common parent.
When an 8-year old goes and asks his parents for a $600 machine that is predominantly going to be used to play FPS games, guess what is the parents' response? "Hell no." Or, since it is an 8-year old, they'll say, "Honey, didn't you say you wanted a bicycle?"
Let's face it: both the 360 and the PS3 are taking a beating by the Wii due to their focus demographic. While the ordinary Slashdot nerd is in the mind of Sony and Microsoft, Nintendo is betting the house on selling their consoles to middle-class, budget-conscious, family-values America. The best selling point of the 360 is Halo 3.141592653...; would you give a blood-bath game to a child? Many parents wouldn't. The PS3 has essentially the same lineup of games, and that's why they're both selling less than the Wii combined. The most "mature" popular game on the Wii is Zelda: Twilight Princess, which is not necessarily offensive to many parents in this country. The Wii also holds the advantage in the "fat-ass" arena, as it encourages children to move; while a kid may not consider that peculiarly important, a parent certainly does.
Then, there's the whole issue about the price. No matter what you say, the law of demand from basic economics states that the quantity demanded of a product will decrease with increasing price, as the number of those who are willing and able to buy simply diminishes with more price. Combine that with the unavailability of a "knockout" PS3 game and the uncertainty over Blue-Ray, and you'll end up asking yourself why anyone would want to buy a PS3, instead of a 360 (for the power gamers) or a Wii (for anyone else).
~~~~
Er, there's a decision process?
And I wonder why I'm trying to be funny on Slashdot, instead of asking on your talk page... heh.
(Mods: Mindspillage is a member of the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees, btw)
Back to the subject at hand: Even if the iPhone had GPL'd software, it means nothing. Apple does not need to open the iPhone/OS X API; all they need to do is to point to a source repository somewhere on the net. In fact, if they did not modify the source code at all, they only need to point to your repo to satisfy the GPL requirements. The GPL source redistribution clauses are only triggered when you are redistributing modified software.
Damn, Texas is worse than Soviet Russia!
No, but if you put a MacBook over your crotch, that will cook your eggs.
And yeah, I did realize I wrote "weight" instead of the proper term, "mass", but then again, this is Slashdot.
Of course, having the wings be flexible is a good thing, but the real important part here is that they are made of carbon fiber. Carbon fiber is much less dense than metal, which reduces the weight of the plane. If the surface area of the wings is held constant, then fuel consumption can be reduced significantly, as the downward pull of gravity is shrunk as well.
Not really. They don't get to pick which version of an article sticks, and are usually reverted. We've had government agencies edit before, but usually role accounts don't fare so well.
Wikipedia, particularly the English Wikipedia, has been very source-oriented for a while now. You can see this in newer articles, for example, the article on the Virginia Tech massacre. Older articles need to catch up, but are getting there. There is also a built-in peer-reviewing system, the Featured article process, and an emerging quality assessment scale.
Why is it "highly unique"? It sounds spot-on to me, as it captures the gist of it while being written in a lay language.
---
~~~~
---
~~~~
As it has been pointed out before, the shuttle can only carry seven astronauts. It isn't like you can just put the extra ones on the cargo bay and bring them home "on the back of the pick-up truck" - the STS comes into Earth's atmosphere at Mach 25, and performs a series of rolls akin to driving on a dirt road. Only that at Mach 25, the bumps that you feel when driving on the dirt road are life-threatening, so you need to properly secure all astronauts or cosmonauts for the penetration of Earth's atmosphere. Hence the big fuss about STS-125.
If I were a member of the ISS crew, I'd be happy if I had a spare Soyuz capsule docked somewhere nearby.