Which is an idiotic point, since nobody suggested that the hyperloop would be built out of stock-pan grade materials. The proposals I saw was to have it built out of pipeline type material.
And where does this magical 'wall' of 15PSI come from? Please explain. The only way you would encounter 15PSI is if the ENTIRE tube was full of air and pressure had equalized. So how does the vehicle encounter 15PSI without first seeing 1PSI, 2PSI, etc? And why would these lower pressures not cause drag which would slow the vehicle, possibly to stop?
Far more likely than hitting a wall would be being slowed, then forced BACKWARDS by the higher pressure. And that could be mitigated by, you know, brakes.
What are you talking about? If they create a perfect vacuum, the pressure INSIDE is 0, and the pressure OUTSIDE is 15PSI, for a DIFFERENCE of 15PSI. The gas line has a pressure INSIDE of 250PSI, and the pressure OUTSIDE is 15PSI, for a DIFFERENCE of 235PSI.
There is not 'a lot more pressure' outside than inside. IF they managed to create a perfect vacuum, the pressure difference would be about 15PSI. There are tons of materials that can handle that puny pressure difference. For comparison, natural gas is pumped through pipelines at about 250PSI. A leak does not cause a catastophic failure of the pipeline.
Huh? The pressure difference, if they manage to make a perfect vacuum, is 1 atmosphere, about 15PSI. Pretty sure regular old steel can handle that. Natural gas in pumped through pipelines at about 250PSI, and a leak does not cause the entire pipeline to catastrophically fail.
Just because the data can ve verified by everyone doesn't mean the plain text of the data has to be visible to everyone. That is one of the advantages of blockchain.
It is obvious that you want the law to say something other than what it does, but it doesn't. Your "what harm" question is silly. The harm is defined by the law, and it is the things I listed.
Have even heard of the first amendment? There is no exception carved out for 'unless some poorly thought out electronic device may hear it.'
The CFAA requires that you knowingly and intentionally access a computer without authorization AND obtain information from, commit fraud with, or intentionally damage said computer. So what information was obtained? What fraud was committed? What damage was done?
Completely wrong. As soon as you connect to my device you are knowingly accessing it. I don't know why you think the fact that you don't know it is my device matters in the slightest.
Also, I didn't quote the whole law because I thought people would be smart enough to look it up themselves it they cared. In addition to knowingly access, you also have to either knowingly cause damage or extract information. None of that happened.
Oh, a reprimand from Google! Well I'll bet that just had them shaking in their boots.
As for the 'heck of a lot of negative backlash' - hah. According to their 2nd quarter report (ended June 30, the quarter in which the ad ran), comparable sales were up 3.9% over last year. Some backlash.
I'll bet a whole lot more people found that ad, and especially all the whining about it, funny than had a problem with it.
Perhaps you are unaware that there are different laws for different offenses? Phishing is not illegal under the laws that prohibit unauthorized use of a computer, because phishing is not per se unauthorized use of a computer. There are, of course, laws against phishing. These laws prohibit actions that would cause a person to reveal private information fraudulently. South Park did no such thing, so those laws don't apply either.
I don't recall Burger King getting in any trouble for that ad. Please describe this 'whole mess'. In fact, the only result of that ad that I could find was that it won grand prize a some advertising convention.
Read the law again. It contains phrases like 'Intentionally access..' and 'knowingly access...' So, prove that they intentionally accessed YOUR computer (which would of course require you to demonstrate that they a) knew you had such a device, b) would have the device in position to respond, and c) knew that you would be watching the show. Ain't gonna fly.
On the other hand, there is this thing called 'free speech'. I don't think 'some idiotic device may hear you and do something stupid' will ever be seen as a valid excuse to restrict speech.
Are you implying that building the wall would be some sort of new law? It is not, the laws on entry to the country already exist, have for a long time, and were created by Congress. 'The wall' is just a means to enforce the law, which is the President's job.
The 'competent authorities' are all part of the executive branch. They report to the President. The 'competent authorities' advise the president, he signs the order.
This might surpise you, but the President is the EXECUTIVE branch of the government. Guess what the job of an executive is - managing. And it is utterly wrong to say other presidents didn't do it. For instance, here is Obama trying to block to the sale of a GERMAN chipmaker to the Chinese
I did answer the question. It is more than 'just libraries'. The JVM, for example, is not 'just a library'.
The 'editions' are just specifications. They are closer to something like POSIX than 'C'. The editions specify not only the libraries, but also things like how applications should be packaged, etc. If your Java installation meets the spec for the 'edition' that is required by an application, then you can run the application WITHOUT having to install a bunch of libraries, etc.
ANYTHING can be legally taken away from you. Try not paying your taxes, or having a judgement against you, or declaring bankruptcy. A lien on something in no way means that ownership has been transferred to someone else, it just means that you have offered up the property as collateral on a loan. Collateral just means that IF you fail to make the payments, you AGREE that ownership of the thing will be TRANSFERRED to the lender. UNTIL that time, it is YOURS.
This 'if you can't do xxx then you don't own it' is beyond stupid. The idiotic claim in this case is that AT&T owns the phone, not me. Can AT&T use the phone? Can AT&T sell the phone to someone else?
And of COURSE you own the home you are making payments on. If you don't own it, who does? Can the bank rent your home to someone? Can it sell it to someone? Can it raze your home? Can it do anything at all that would normally be associated with ownership? The answer to all of those is a resounding NO. Why? Because it is NOT THEIRS. MY name is on the legal document known as a deed, not the banks. They are just listed as a lienholder, not an 'owner' in any way.
Java is not just a language, it is also a platform (JVM, APIs, etc). The different editions are for the plaform not the language. So there is a platform for 'normal' usage (SE), a platform for long-running, network intensive applications (EE), and a platform for lightweight use (ME).
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, glass is a good indication of what happens to steel. Good grief,
Which is an idiotic point, since nobody suggested that the hyperloop would be built out of stock-pan grade materials. The proposals I saw was to have it built out of pipeline type material.
And where does this magical 'wall' of 15PSI come from? Please explain. The only way you would encounter 15PSI is if the ENTIRE tube was full of air and pressure had equalized. So how does the vehicle encounter 15PSI without first seeing 1PSI, 2PSI, etc? And why would these lower pressures not cause drag which would slow the vehicle, possibly to stop?
Far more likely than hitting a wall would be being slowed, then forced BACKWARDS by the higher pressure. And that could be mitigated by, you know, brakes.
What are you talking about? If they create a perfect vacuum, the pressure INSIDE is 0, and the pressure OUTSIDE is 15PSI, for a DIFFERENCE of 15PSI. The gas line has a pressure INSIDE of 250PSI, and the pressure OUTSIDE is 15PSI, for a DIFFERENCE of 235PSI.
There is not 'a lot more pressure' outside than inside. IF they managed to create a perfect vacuum, the pressure difference would be about 15PSI. There are tons of materials that can handle that puny pressure difference. For comparison, natural gas is pumped through pipelines at about 250PSI. A leak does not cause a catastophic failure of the pipeline.
Huh? The pressure difference, if they manage to make a perfect vacuum, is 1 atmosphere, about 15PSI. Pretty sure regular old steel can handle that. Natural gas in pumped through pipelines at about 250PSI, and a leak does not cause the entire pipeline to catastrophically fail.
How is a 'containment failure' going to cause the line to implode?
Just because the data can ve verified by everyone doesn't mean the plain text of the data has to be visible to everyone. That is one of the advantages of blockchain.
It is obvious that you want the law to say something other than what it does, but it doesn't. Your "what harm" question is silly. The harm is defined by the law, and it is the things I listed.
Have even heard of the first amendment? There is no exception carved out for 'unless some poorly thought out electronic device may hear it.'
The CFAA requires that you knowingly and intentionally access a computer without authorization AND obtain information from, commit fraud with, or intentionally damage said computer. So what information was obtained? What fraud was committed? What damage was done?
Completely wrong. As soon as you connect to my device you are knowingly accessing it. I don't know why you think the fact that you don't know it is my device matters in the slightest.
Also, I didn't quote the whole law because I thought people would be smart enough to look it up themselves it they cared. In addition to knowingly access, you also have to either knowingly cause damage or extract information. None of that happened.
Oh, a reprimand from Google! Well I'll bet that just had them shaking in their boots.
As for the 'heck of a lot of negative backlash' - hah. According to their 2nd quarter report (ended June 30, the quarter in which the ad ran), comparable sales were up 3.9% over last year. Some backlash.
I'll bet a whole lot more people found that ad, and especially all the whining about it, funny than had a problem with it.
Perhaps you are unaware that there are different laws for different offenses? Phishing is not illegal under the laws that prohibit unauthorized use of a computer, because phishing is not per se unauthorized use of a computer. There are, of course, laws against phishing. These laws prohibit actions that would cause a person to reveal private information fraudulently. South Park did no such thing, so those laws don't apply either.
I don't recall Burger King getting in any trouble for that ad. Please describe this 'whole mess'. In fact, the only result of that ad that I could find was that it won grand prize a some advertising convention.
Read the law again. It contains phrases like 'Intentionally access..' and 'knowingly access...' So, prove that they intentionally accessed YOUR computer (which would of course require you to demonstrate that they a) knew you had such a device, b) would have the device in position to respond, and c) knew that you would be watching the show. Ain't gonna fly.
On the other hand, there is this thing called 'free speech'. I don't think 'some idiotic device may hear you and do something stupid' will ever be seen as a valid excuse to restrict speech.
Are you implying that building the wall would be some sort of new law? It is not, the laws on entry to the country already exist, have for a long time, and were created by Congress. 'The wall' is just a means to enforce the law, which is the President's job.
The 'competent authorities' are all part of the executive branch. They report to the President. The 'competent authorities' advise the president, he signs the order.
This might surpise you, but the President is the EXECUTIVE branch of the government. Guess what the job of an executive is - managing. And it is utterly wrong to say other presidents didn't do it. For instance, here is Obama trying to block to the sale of a GERMAN chipmaker to the Chinese
I did answer the question. It is more than 'just libraries'. The JVM, for example, is not 'just a library'.
The 'editions' are just specifications. They are closer to something like POSIX than 'C'. The editions specify not only the libraries, but also things like how applications should be packaged, etc. If your Java installation meets the spec for the 'edition' that is required by an application, then you can run the application WITHOUT having to install a bunch of libraries, etc.
ANYTHING can be legally taken away from you. Try not paying your taxes, or having a judgement against you, or declaring bankruptcy. A lien on something in no way means that ownership has been transferred to someone else, it just means that you have offered up the property as collateral on a loan. Collateral just means that IF you fail to make the payments, you AGREE that ownership of the thing will be TRANSFERRED to the lender. UNTIL that time, it is YOURS.
This 'if you can't do xxx then you don't own it' is beyond stupid. The idiotic claim in this case is that AT&T owns the phone, not me. Can AT&T use the phone? Can AT&T sell the phone to someone else?
And of COURSE you own the home you are making payments on. If you don't own it, who does? Can the bank rent your home to someone? Can it sell it to someone? Can it raze your home? Can it do anything at all that would normally be associated with ownership? The answer to all of those is a resounding NO. Why? Because it is NOT THEIRS. MY name is on the legal document known as a deed, not the banks. They are just listed as a lienholder, not an 'owner' in any way.
It is NOT 'AT&T's phone until it's paid for'. It is YOUR phone. Where does this idiotic 'if you owe money on something you don't own it' come from?
Java is not just a language, it is also a platform (JVM, APIs, etc). The different editions are for the plaform not the language. So there is a platform for 'normal' usage (SE), a platform for long-running, network intensive applications (EE), and a platform for lightweight use (ME).
how exactly do you 'assasinate' someone with an anti-lock brake system?
When was the last time that a corporation committed murder?
Guess you missed the whole state run institution bit, eh?