you can usually hit some key to load hardware setup or the boot options.
Again, if the machine is booting using EFI "fast boot" you often can't even get to those either. I wanted to get to my motherboard's F12 boot menu. I tried over and over, just rebooting or shutting off and powering back on and never got in but the OS started booting before the keyboard had even initialized. I had to turn it off, unplug the power cord, drain the caps by pressing the power button repeatedly before it would do a normal boot so that I could get to the boot menu.
Just do a restart instead of a shutdown. Then hard power off the system at the moment of the reboot. This is easier done on desktop, else you'll have to remove the battery - because on a modern system, you won't have 7 seconds to shut it down with the power button before Windows is half-booted again.
Taking up space in RAM doesn't use battery power. Eating CPU cycles does. Something sitting in the background doing nothing doesn't need those CPU cycles. On the other hand, Chrome really does have more of a problem with that than Edge. Edge's problem is the UI.
The FDA is for more than blocking legitimate treatments. Its origin is based around mislabeled or adulterated drugs, which is a far more serious problem that would come back without some oversight.
conversely, one might sit next to someone watching porn on a screen that isn't visible by others, using headphones at a reasonable volume so nobody else can hear anything, and doing nothing else but eating a hamburger.... bothering nobody.
While using a significant amount of bandwidth and reducing the capacity for everyone else...bothering a number of people.
If you "get caught" that means you're doing it in public. There are already public decency laws out there. Whether you're the one who's nude or you're broadcasting a picture of it to the room.
And most writing isn't in books. Work done for hire isn't owned by you. False argument there. And if you're writing software for hire as an independent company, your contact should allow for code reuse in future projects (which lets you earn money again on previous work).
To display privately in their home. The benefit of them ending up in museums decades later is not very relevant.
Movie production is not effectively free. Costs are inflated, but not as much as you describe. A cinema-quality camera is no less than $1k, sans lenses. Motion stabilization hardware is sometimes needed (not cheap either). Lighting requires much more than natural light. 1000W or more to light an average scene or you'll need an even more expensive camera to not have a grainy mess.
The only free editing software worth anything is the commercial but free basic Resolve, and that won't continue to exist without commercial incentive for selling the full version. And even that doesn't have a lot to offer for effects or compositing. No open source video editor comes close on even basic features. I've tried them. Blender is actually great for rendering photorealistic 3D scenes and some effects, honestly, but you underestimate the cost of the hundreds of man-hours required for the rest of effects work, especially rotoscoping.
Maybe I just have high standards, but i hate amateur produced video with poor production quality.
simply not allowing a corporation to hold rights to copyright.
And there was never a good movie ever made again. Nor commercial OS or software. No financial incentive to create anything beyond the scope of one man.
Except copyright only protects...copying verbatim or making derivative copies, still significantly like the original text/work. A character is also an idea - it's protected partly by trademark. Paramount could license these characters for little to no money and still be "protecting" their trademark.
There's no one who knows better than Disney. A lot of Mickey cartoons would likely enter the Public Domain, were it not for them using their character as a trademark. Time will tell whether it's even possible to distribute those easily without a trademark lawsuit.
Slashdot Mirror
I mean the motherboard's boot drive selection menu, not Windows boot menu.
you can usually hit some key to load hardware setup or the boot options.
Again, if the machine is booting using EFI "fast boot" you often can't even get to those either. I wanted to get to my motherboard's F12 boot menu. I tried over and over, just rebooting or shutting off and powering back on and never got in but the OS started booting before the keyboard had even initialized. I had to turn it off, unplug the power cord, drain the caps by pressing the power button repeatedly before it would do a normal boot so that I could get to the boot menu.
Just do a restart instead of a shutdown. Then hard power off the system at the moment of the reboot. This is easier done on desktop, else you'll have to remove the battery - because on a modern system, you won't have 7 seconds to shut it down with the power button before Windows is half-booted again.
already running in the background
Taking up space in RAM doesn't use battery power. Eating CPU cycles does. Something sitting in the background doing nothing doesn't need those CPU cycles. On the other hand, Chrome really does have more of a problem with that than Edge. Edge's problem is the UI.
a 6'5 greasy convict grabbing you and ass raping you.
Is that what the kids mean when they say "Free health checkup" these days? It's hard to keep up.
Who did they offer it to for free? Only people who paid for another (ad-free) version of Windows get Windows 10 for free.
You really care which architecture the preloader was made for? That only runs once.
Unless you only care about looking at plain text, most "special" contrast settings kill the color accuracy.
The FDA is for more than blocking legitimate treatments. Its origin is based around mislabeled or adulterated drugs, which is a far more serious problem that would come back without some oversight.
conversely, one might sit next to someone watching porn on a screen that isn't visible by others, using headphones at a reasonable volume so nobody else can hear anything, and doing nothing else but eating a hamburger.... bothering nobody.
While using a significant amount of bandwidth and reducing the capacity for everyone else...bothering a number of people.
If you "get caught" that means you're doing it in public. There are already public decency laws out there. Whether you're the one who's nude or you're broadcasting a picture of it to the room.
So it's bad censorship to not broadcast porn in McDonalds and Starbucks? Have you ever had to sit next to someone doing this at a public wifi hotspot?
If this is happening often enough to even warrant the effort, I can't see a real downside here.
People aren't buying albums anymore as a general rule - regardless of what you or I think.
And most writing isn't in books. Work done for hire isn't owned by you. False argument there. And if you're writing software for hire as an independent company, your contact should allow for code reuse in future projects (which lets you earn money again on previous work).
You even quoted the OP and still missed the point. If copyright is abolished, why would anyone buy a book?
willing to spend millions on works of art
To display privately in their home. The benefit of them ending up in museums decades later is not very relevant.
Movie production is not effectively free. Costs are inflated, but not as much as you describe. A cinema-quality camera is no less than $1k, sans lenses. Motion stabilization hardware is sometimes needed (not cheap either). Lighting requires much more than natural light. 1000W or more to light an average scene or you'll need an even more expensive camera to not have a grainy mess.
The only free editing software worth anything is the commercial but free basic Resolve, and that won't continue to exist without commercial incentive for selling the full version. And even that doesn't have a lot to offer for effects or compositing. No open source video editor comes close on even basic features. I've tried them. Blender is actually great for rendering photorealistic 3D scenes and some effects, honestly, but you underestimate the cost of the hundreds of man-hours required for the rest of effects work, especially rotoscoping.
Maybe I just have high standards, but i hate amateur produced video with poor production quality.
simply not allowing a corporation to hold rights to copyright.
And there was never a good movie ever made again. Nor commercial OS or software. No financial incentive to create anything beyond the scope of one man.
The standard is already higher than that for airplanes for auto-pilot. I still wouldn't buy one, but I also don't like flying either.
Except copyright only protects...copying verbatim or making derivative copies, still significantly like the original text/work. A character is also an idea - it's protected partly by trademark. Paramount could license these characters for little to no money and still be "protecting" their trademark.
There's no one who knows better than Disney. A lot of Mickey cartoons would likely enter the Public Domain, were it not for them using their character as a trademark. Time will tell whether it's even possible to distribute those easily without a trademark lawsuit.
You mean less than $2/mo. per person * 10 years? Oh, what exorbitant services, this must involve.
Why? Are they still a threat?
Only if water going through a pipe is a leak.
buying these for all eternity
Sure, just like the broadcast TV companies did before that....except they no longer have that spectrum.
I only read the post body. Titles are just that - titles. OP did not indicate that they don't use the app anywhere I should be expected to read.
How does that do anything extra to protect your location? Your phone has a built-in GPS chip.