They are not 'making a mistake.' In this case, left and right are ambiguous. It is why is real situations like this (eg a director telling a dancer which way to point) the terms 'stage left' or 'house left' would be used. Or at the very least, 'your left' or 'my left'.
BC/DR does not mean no outages. It doesn't even mean no extended outages. It simply means that there is a plan on how to eventually recover. The acceptable length of time to recovery entirely depends on the impact of the outage. If every second of downtime means lost money, having a hot backup datacenter in a different location makes sense. If, like in this case, a few days of downtime make no real difference (it can take years to go through the patent process, what is another few days going to matter), then a DR plan of 'buy new hardware and restore from backup tapes' may make the most sense.
Ah, I thought you meant the people who thought it was a scam were the normal people who know they have no real chance of winning but keep playing. Sorry.
I didn't see what the actual manipulation was, did you? He could have manipulated the RNG so that instead of generating a new number every time it was called it just returned the next of a set of previously generated numbers. If he had access to that set of numbers, which could have been generated perfectly, he would know the winning numbers, and everyone else's chances would be exactly like they were before.
Why would you spend $30 on a steak when $2 hamburgers are available? Why would you spend $1000 on a home entertainment system when you can watch videos on your cell phone? Why would you spend $75 going to a concert when the radio is free? None of these make sense from a purely financial point of view, but people do them because they enjoy it. Tell us what you spend your money on, and we will tell you why you are wrong.
That is a stupid likening. The lottery is random, used car sales are not. I play the lottery when the jackpot is getting up there, say $80M or so. Do I think I am going win? Certainly not. But I know for certain that I definitely won't win if I don't buy a ticket. The loss of a few dollars means nothing, but a win of $80M is a life changing event. So for a few bucks I get to spend a little time fantasizing about having that money. In other words, it is a couple bucks spent on entertainment. Why don't you tell us what you spend your entertainment dollar on, so we can say how stupid you are?
What are you talking about? Powerball is run by the Multi State Lottery Association, which is owned and operated by the member state lotteries. 'A European Group' has nothing to do with it, and never has. And CA, 'with its massive number of citizens', didn't even carry Power Ball until April 2013.
The numbers in this particular lottery are drawn by computer. Other games use balls drawn on live TV. Even with the live drawing method, fraud is possible.
People always bring up the George Harrison thing like it illustrates some point about the length of copyright or how the author of some obscure song can claim some new song is a copy. The truth is "He's So Fine" was a number one hit for four weeks. Billboard ranked it the number 5 song of 1963. It was only 7 years old when George recorded "My Sweet Lord". He was found to have infringed the copyright not because of some flaw in copyright, but because it was inconceivable that he did not know He's So Fine, and, consciously or not, he copied it.
Exactly which corporations are made up of something other than people, specifically the owners of said company? Should unions and other organizations (the NRA, the EFF, etc) also not be allowed to lobby?
What kind of stupid argument is that? You are making the rather enormous assumption that had the present copyright term been in place they still would have made the movie and they would have not obtained permission. What evidence do you have of that?
Of course, you do have a point. Disney completely stopped making new movies after the copyright was extended. This was necessary because there is no old material that is out of copyright, and it is impossible to make a new work that doesn't infringe on a copyright. Oh wait, none of that is true? Never mind.
If trivial crap like that gets you on the list then the list is worthless and won't be used. On the other hand, if you have a long history of 'returns' or using bad coupons that probably is something that other businesses are interested in.
Businesses want customers, and they want to spend the minimum amount they must on things like security. If this system is flagging too many people that shouldn't be on it that drives away customers, and makes them spend more on security to watch the people on the list.
Oddly enough, this law, like all the other laws, has a definitions section. Here is the definition they use:
“Autonomous vehicle” means any vehicle equipped with technology that has the capability of operating or driving the vehicle without the active physical control or monitoring of a natural person, whether or not the technology is engaged, excluding vehicles equipped with one or more systems that enhance safety or provide driver assistance but are not capable of driving or operating the vehicle without the active physical control or monitoring of a natural person.
Because the drivers test does not cover everything you will encounter. For example, the other day I was parked in a parking deck at an event. The event ended, and everyone started to leave. But there was some problem near the exit. So they had a cop standing at a different part of the garage, motioning for people to ignore the 'exit' signs, and to drive back down the entrance ramp the wrong way. This put you on a one-way street also heading the wrong way. No problem, because the cops blocked the street. They then motioned you the wrong way down yet another one-way street, where you finally joined up with the normal traffic.
All that is covered by 'follow the directions of the police'. But is an autonomous vehicle going to understand the motions of an officer, and drive the wrong way on several streets? Humans had no problem with it.
This may surprise you, but different people find different things pleasant to look at. Some people LIKE looking at acres of tobacco, dilapidated barns and silos, etc. You can even buy artwork of such things. Some people LIKE to look at big cities, other people think they are as ugly as ugly can be. Who are you to be deciding what the town should or should not be looking at?
So I take it you would not object to anything that happens near your property? Want to build an open-pit mine? Go ahead! Want to build a giant Walmart? Go ahead! Want to build a trash burning facility? Go ahead!
Or are you one of those people that think only YOUR concerns are valid, and everyone else who has any concerns is an idiot?
Since they already have three solar farms, I guess they are probably well familiar with what they look like, and have decided they don't want a fourth one in that spot.
But some jackass saying he thinks there should be restrictions does not actually equal restrictions. So I am wondering what, exactly, America is supposed to stop. The only possible answer is that America should stop people like this from speaking, which I object to.
Slashdot Mirror
They are not 'making a mistake.' In this case, left and right are ambiguous. It is why is real situations like this (eg a director telling a dancer which way to point) the terms 'stage left' or 'house left' would be used. Or at the very least, 'your left' or 'my left'.
BC/DR does not mean no outages. It doesn't even mean no extended outages. It simply means that there is a plan on how to eventually recover. The acceptable length of time to recovery entirely depends on the impact of the outage. If every second of downtime means lost money, having a hot backup datacenter in a different location makes sense. If, like in this case, a few days of downtime make no real difference (it can take years to go through the patent process, what is another few days going to matter), then a DR plan of 'buy new hardware and restore from backup tapes' may make the most sense.
Ah, I thought you meant the people who thought it was a scam were the normal people who know they have no real chance of winning but keep playing. Sorry.
I didn't see what the actual manipulation was, did you? He could have manipulated the RNG so that instead of generating a new number every time it was called it just returned the next of a set of previously generated numbers. If he had access to that set of numbers, which could have been generated perfectly, he would know the winning numbers, and everyone else's chances would be exactly like they were before.
Why would you spend $30 on a steak when $2 hamburgers are available? Why would you spend $1000 on a home entertainment system when you can watch videos on your cell phone? Why would you spend $75 going to a concert when the radio is free? None of these make sense from a purely financial point of view, but people do them because they enjoy it. Tell us what you spend your money on, and we will tell you why you are wrong.
That is a stupid likening. The lottery is random, used car sales are not. I play the lottery when the jackpot is getting up there, say $80M or so. Do I think I am going win? Certainly not. But I know for certain that I definitely won't win if I don't buy a ticket. The loss of a few dollars means nothing, but a win of $80M is a life changing event. So for a few bucks I get to spend a little time fantasizing about having that money. In other words, it is a couple bucks spent on entertainment. Why don't you tell us what you spend your entertainment dollar on, so we can say how stupid you are?
What are you talking about? Powerball is run by the Multi State Lottery Association, which is owned and operated by the member state lotteries. 'A European Group' has nothing to do with it, and never has. And CA, 'with its massive number of citizens', didn't even carry Power Ball until April 2013.
The numbers in this particular lottery are drawn by computer. Other games use balls drawn on live TV. Even with the live drawing method, fraud is possible.
Why would you think lotteries are rigged?
People always bring up the George Harrison thing like it illustrates some point about the length of copyright or how the author of some obscure song can claim some new song is a copy. The truth is "He's So Fine" was a number one hit for four weeks. Billboard ranked it the number 5 song of 1963. It was only 7 years old when George recorded "My Sweet Lord". He was found to have infringed the copyright not because of some flaw in copyright, but because it was inconceivable that he did not know He's So Fine, and, consciously or not, he copied it.
Exactly which corporations are made up of something other than people, specifically the owners of said company? Should unions and other organizations (the NRA, the EFF, etc) also not be allowed to lobby?
What kind of stupid argument is that? You are making the rather enormous assumption that had the present copyright term been in place they still would have made the movie and they would have not obtained permission. What evidence do you have of that?
Of course, you do have a point. Disney completely stopped making new movies after the copyright was extended. This was necessary because there is no old material that is out of copyright, and it is impossible to make a new work that doesn't infringe on a copyright. Oh wait, none of that is true? Never mind.
If trivial crap like that gets you on the list then the list is worthless and won't be used. On the other hand, if you have a long history of 'returns' or using bad coupons that probably is something that other businesses are interested in.
Businesses want customers, and they want to spend the minimum amount they must on things like security. If this system is flagging too many people that shouldn't be on it that drives away customers, and makes them spend more on security to watch the people on the list.
Oddly enough, this law, like all the other laws, has a definitions section. Here is the definition they use:
“Autonomous vehicle” means any vehicle equipped with technology that has the
capability of operating or driving the vehicle without the active physical control or monitoring of
a natural person, whether or not the technology is engaged, excluding vehicles
equipped with one
or more systems that enhance safety or provide driver assistance but are not capable of driving or
operating the vehicle without the active physical control or monitoring of a natural person.
So no, cruise control, etc, do not count.
The licensed driver solves the liability problem. If your car causes an accident, you are at fault.
Because the drivers test does not cover everything you will encounter. For example, the other day I was parked in a parking deck at an event. The event ended, and everyone started to leave. But there was some problem near the exit. So they had a cop standing at a different part of the garage, motioning for people to ignore the 'exit' signs, and to drive back down the entrance ramp the wrong way. This put you on a one-way street also heading the wrong way. No problem, because the cops blocked the street. They then motioned you the wrong way down yet another one-way street, where you finally joined up with the normal traffic.
All that is covered by 'follow the directions of the police'. But is an autonomous vehicle going to understand the motions of an officer, and drive the wrong way on several streets? Humans had no problem with it.
Hence the 'on that spot'
This may surprise you, but different people find different things pleasant to look at. Some people LIKE looking at acres of tobacco, dilapidated barns and silos, etc. You can even buy artwork of such things. Some people LIKE to look at big cities, other people think they are as ugly as ugly can be. Who are you to be deciding what the town should or should not be looking at?
So I take it you would not object to anything that happens near your property? Want to build an open-pit mine? Go ahead! Want to build a giant Walmart? Go ahead! Want to build a trash burning facility? Go ahead!
Or are you one of those people that think only YOUR concerns are valid, and everyone else who has any concerns is an idiot?
Since they already have three solar farms, I guess they are probably well familiar with what they look like, and have decided they don't want a fourth one in that spot.
How about because being surrounded by solar farms is about as aesthetically pleasing as being surrounded by parking lots.
Compared to 120 other countries with higher murder rates.
So, let me see if I have this right. He said something about restricting freedom. You object to this, so you think his freedom should be restricted?
But some jackass saying he thinks there should be restrictions does not actually equal restrictions. So I am wondering what, exactly, America is supposed to stop. The only possible answer is that America should stop people like this from speaking, which I object to.
Stop what? Allowing people to state their opinions, no matter how idiotic they may be? No, we won't.