As one commenter (GregGoodson) below the story mentions:
"I’ve run down this road a few times when I lived in Park City probably not the most pedestrian friendly road, but I probably wouldn’t go down this road walking from A to B in her case because a) there is free public transportation in Park City and b) while those pictures posted above are nice, there are massive snowbanks on the side of the road in January in Park City you can bet that dirt path wasn’t there when she got struck.
If she was from Park City, she should have known better (I’ve read other news reports that she is a resident there)."
They do get snow in winter in Utah. This would make her actions even worse than people have mentioned thus far. There would be no shoulder to walk on because of snowplows piling up the snow on the roadside. Yet she still decided to walk there, likely in the traffic lane. This is her own stupidity at work.
As for common sense, at least my brain tells me to sue the driver of the car that hit her. Why sue Google? (Then again, I do use my brain from time to time...) Oh yes, that's right. DEEP POCKETS. Let's see if she can strike it rich (and her laywer, too!), despite this all being her own fault.
If installing "Other OS" is supported, clustering for research is of no consequence. If Linux clusters, it's supported because it's an "Other OS". It was marketed as a computer that could run Linux. What you chose to do with several of them (e.g. cluster them together) should have no effect on the warranty because Linux is supported.
And what of kids gaming that leave the PS3 on for days at a time? Sure, I'd suggest turning it off, but that doesn't mean they're stressing the system in an outrageous way.
I'd argue that Sony DOES owe us something. We paid for the "Other OS" feature as part of the package. By simply removing the ability to use that feature, you're being a giant douche. And if it's illegal enough that we can return the PS3 to the store for a refund from the retailer, it's illegal enough that Sony should just pay the consumers for their asshattery directly. Why should Best Buy (or any other retailer) have to pay for something Sony does and is totally out of their control?
I'd be fine with that. It would be nice to have a concrete answer for stuff like this. I can understand that not all of these EULAs would be invalid (or partially invalid). But when they're really long, technically-advanced garble that most people won't understand, I wouldn't be surprised if they threw them out entirely because customers wouldn't be expected to understand it.
It's also been found that in many cases these "we may change this product anytime we want to, without your permission/notification" issues are not legal, despite what the packaging, EULA, etc. say. If this goes through, I'm totally in on this class-action suit, despite the fact that I don't use Other OS very often.
If something sucks, is open, and I'm not fixing it, it's very likely because I don't know jack crap about the project. In fact, I don't program. And if I'm digging in a wiki or documentation to find something it means I need help on a topic. So how can I fix it if I don't know what the hell is wrong?
I like OSS projects. But you expect all people using the software to pitch in and help, when many people don't have the necessary skills or knowledge to do so. That's called being a douche. Nice work alienating your fellow would-be (well, not anymore!) users.
Yep, I'm one of those that gave up. I'm not a hardcore programmer, command line user, or linux geek. But I wanted good firmware on my Linksys WRT54GL, so I looked around. I checked out Tomato, OpenWRT, and DD-WRT. I heard good things about OpenWRT, but couldn't understand anything on their web site about choosing a firmware or how to install it. So I tossed that idea in the trash and went with DD-WRT.
It's one thing to already be familiar with the project and figure it out. But to ask someone new to router firmware in general to have to dig and dig and experiment to figure it out is asking an awful lot. Without good documentation for something like this, your project will just be ignored for something that's easier to understand, install, and is better supported.
Not being familiar with the rules of the road in the UK, I didn't know how they prosecute speeding offenses. Thanks for explaining it for me. That makes more sense.
Then you don't have a choice but to upgrade everything, now do you? It'd be cheaper/easier to just put it in a socket and lock the socket, like replaceable CPUs. Soldering it in forces people to upgrade the mobo and CPU, boosting revenue.
My whole point revolves around the fact that they cannot say exactly how fast you went. So, yes, they can charge you with speeding using your average speed. But they cannot say what your actual speed was. You'd think that a police department would want to know your exact speed just because they could then hit you with a higher fine. Therefore this whole setup is a waste of time and money. They'd have to put up a TON of cameras to get a more accurate speed of your vehicle. And again, they're not actually catching a real speed. They're averaging. Estimating. This shouldn't be a valid way to do things. Being a scientific community, I would think others would realize there are holes/flaws in this system. The largest one being that if one is not directly observed committing a violation, how can they be charged with it? Cops here in the US have to follow that rule, even if they're positive someone violated a traffic law. There must be direct observation, not "I'm pretty sure they did it!". Speed cameras do this (albeit with errors at times). This system does not.
I understand the laws of physics, as a mechanical engineer. I'm not debating them. I'm debating the legality of the system being described here.
Yes, let's use taxpayer money by strapping cameras onto every city-owned vehicle, building, and street sign (let alone private mailboxes...)! Sounds like a good use of funding to me.
So they're supposed to take the fastest average speed that you had? How's that supposed to help? How do they know you didn't do 55 in a 25 and 25 in a 55 to average out to somewhere in the middle? Again, this concept is stupid. They're estimating an average speed. Unless they KNOW how fast you actually went, they can't use this technology for anything useful. Even with cameras at regular intervals, they still don't know what your fastest speed is. For all they know, you go 100mph down one stretch of road, stop for food, and then go 100mph again, and it somehow averages out to right around the speed limit.
When it comes to speeding, you have to catch the person actually speeding. Assumptions like speed estimates make for a slippery slope.
I guess this tends to highlight my lack of knowledge around hardware and chipsets. I'll concede this round to you. But it would actually save Intel (or their partners) some cash by not having to come up with a new socket every time they develop new CPUs. They need new molds, tooling, etc. to manufacture even just the socket itself. I guess this line of thought doesn't work so well when dealing with this industry.
So, there's no way to do this using the current socket/motherboard? My guess is that they do this purposely (at least some of the time) so that users need new hardware for their upgrades. It generates more revenue. I work in the software resale industry and the software vendors pull this crap all the time. (e.g. no backward compatibility forces more users to upgrade so that they can all work together)
It likely uses existing GPS technology. I doubt a new satellite is required. But it likely requires more speed cameras to be installed. Sounds like someone's paying off politicians to boost business for speed cameras..? *puts on tin foil hat*
My guess is they'll use some kind of straight-line calculation with compensation built in for taking roads rather than actually driving in a straight line in order to estimate someone's speed. But how can they really prove anything when they have no idea what route was taken and how fast the car actually went? Technically all they're doing is taking a photo of something in two different spots at two different times. There's nothing being done to actually measure speed directly. How do they come up with such an algorithm or calculation? Roads may have different speed limits. Unless they have speed cameras on every single road, there's no reliable way to actually come up with a solid number for their velocity. This is stupid. And I wouldn't be surprised if someone managed to get it tossed into obsolescence fairly quickly.
How the hell did this turn into a post about religion? You are the one who misunderstood my post. Twisting my words into some bizarre, off-topic, religious slant is idiotic and completely misses what I was trying to convey.
My point was that everyone makes mistakes. Do we need to burn someone at the stake everytime a mistake is committed?
And to clarify, that lesson was supposed to convey the exact point I was making. Jesus basically said if the pharisees were perfect they had the privilege of holding themselves above others, justifying their righteous indignation. But they knew they weren't perfect, so the lesson was meant to put them in their place. To make them realize they aren't in a position to judge others, as they're just as sinful as everyone else. After all, every righteous act they performed was really in their own self-interest; basically a sin unto itself.
Ever stop and think that maybe another customer at the bar picked it up? It's an iPhone. I'm sure he could've sold a current-gen iPhone for a nice chunk of change to someone, let alone the next-gen iPhone prototype. Or maybe he wanted to return it to the owner until he realized what he had.
Like you're perfect, never making any mistakes or having a lapse in judgment? Give the guy a break and stop being a douche.
"Let he who is without sin cast the first stone." Etc., etc....
I'm not saying the guy didn't do something stupid. But does losing a phone have to ruin the guy's career..? Apple's still going to sell tons of these new iPhones. They'll still make a ton of money. I don't think that this is really going to hurt Apple much, if at all. Give him a stern talking to, a reprimand, whatever. Is the quality of his work worth keeping him? It might be. But I doubt they'll let him test another prototype anytime soon.
Slashdot Mirror
They do get snow in winter in Utah. This would make her actions even worse than people have mentioned thus far. There would be no shoulder to walk on because of snowplows piling up the snow on the roadside. Yet she still decided to walk there, likely in the traffic lane. This is her own stupidity at work.
As for common sense, at least my brain tells me to sue the driver of the car that hit her. Why sue Google? (Then again, I do use my brain from time to time...) Oh yes, that's right. DEEP POCKETS. Let's see if she can strike it rich (and her laywer, too!), despite this all being her own fault.
If installing "Other OS" is supported, clustering for research is of no consequence. If Linux clusters, it's supported because it's an "Other OS". It was marketed as a computer that could run Linux. What you chose to do with several of them (e.g. cluster them together) should have no effect on the warranty because Linux is supported.
And what of kids gaming that leave the PS3 on for days at a time? Sure, I'd suggest turning it off, but that doesn't mean they're stressing the system in an outrageous way.
I'd argue that Sony DOES owe us something. We paid for the "Other OS" feature as part of the package. By simply removing the ability to use that feature, you're being a giant douche. And if it's illegal enough that we can return the PS3 to the store for a refund from the retailer, it's illegal enough that Sony should just pay the consumers for their asshattery directly. Why should Best Buy (or any other retailer) have to pay for something Sony does and is totally out of their control?
I'd be fine with that. It would be nice to have a concrete answer for stuff like this. I can understand that not all of these EULAs would be invalid (or partially invalid). But when they're really long, technically-advanced garble that most people won't understand, I wouldn't be surprised if they threw them out entirely because customers wouldn't be expected to understand it.
^Citation needed...^
It's also been found that in many cases these "we may change this product anytime we want to, without your permission/notification" issues are not legal, despite what the packaging, EULA, etc. say. If this goes through, I'm totally in on this class-action suit, despite the fact that I don't use Other OS very often.
This should've been under Baloo's comment... oops.
If something sucks, is open, and I'm not fixing it, it's very likely because I don't know jack crap about the project. In fact, I don't program. And if I'm digging in a wiki or documentation to find something it means I need help on a topic. So how can I fix it if I don't know what the hell is wrong?
I like OSS projects. But you expect all people using the software to pitch in and help, when many people don't have the necessary skills or knowledge to do so. That's called being a douche. Nice work alienating your fellow would-be (well, not anymore!) users.
Yep, I'm one of those that gave up. I'm not a hardcore programmer, command line user, or linux geek. But I wanted good firmware on my Linksys WRT54GL, so I looked around. I checked out Tomato, OpenWRT, and DD-WRT. I heard good things about OpenWRT, but couldn't understand anything on their web site about choosing a firmware or how to install it. So I tossed that idea in the trash and went with DD-WRT.
It's one thing to already be familiar with the project and figure it out. But to ask someone new to router firmware in general to have to dig and dig and experiment to figure it out is asking an awful lot. Without good documentation for something like this, your project will just be ignored for something that's easier to understand, install, and is better supported.
Not being familiar with the rules of the road in the UK, I didn't know how they prosecute speeding offenses. Thanks for explaining it for me. That makes more sense.
Point taken. But that would still be some serious coin to put all those cameras out there and maintain/watch them.
^^THIS!!
Does a hamster cage count..?
Then you don't have a choice but to upgrade everything, now do you? It'd be cheaper/easier to just put it in a socket and lock the socket, like replaceable CPUs. Soldering it in forces people to upgrade the mobo and CPU, boosting revenue.
My whole point revolves around the fact that they cannot say exactly how fast you went. So, yes, they can charge you with speeding using your average speed. But they cannot say what your actual speed was. You'd think that a police department would want to know your exact speed just because they could then hit you with a higher fine. Therefore this whole setup is a waste of time and money. They'd have to put up a TON of cameras to get a more accurate speed of your vehicle. And again, they're not actually catching a real speed. They're averaging. Estimating. This shouldn't be a valid way to do things. Being a scientific community, I would think others would realize there are holes/flaws in this system. The largest one being that if one is not directly observed committing a violation, how can they be charged with it? Cops here in the US have to follow that rule, even if they're positive someone violated a traffic law. There must be direct observation, not "I'm pretty sure they did it!". Speed cameras do this (albeit with errors at times). This system does not.
I understand the laws of physics, as a mechanical engineer. I'm not debating them. I'm debating the legality of the system being described here.
Yes, let's use taxpayer money by strapping cameras onto every city-owned vehicle, building, and street sign (let alone private mailboxes...)! Sounds like a good use of funding to me.
/sarcasm
//glad I don't live in the UK...
So they're supposed to take the fastest average speed that you had? How's that supposed to help? How do they know you didn't do 55 in a 25 and 25 in a 55 to average out to somewhere in the middle? Again, this concept is stupid. They're estimating an average speed. Unless they KNOW how fast you actually went, they can't use this technology for anything useful. Even with cameras at regular intervals, they still don't know what your fastest speed is. For all they know, you go 100mph down one stretch of road, stop for food, and then go 100mph again, and it somehow averages out to right around the speed limit.
When it comes to speeding, you have to catch the person actually speeding. Assumptions like speed estimates make for a slippery slope.
I guess this tends to highlight my lack of knowledge around hardware and chipsets. I'll concede this round to you. But it would actually save Intel (or their partners) some cash by not having to come up with a new socket every time they develop new CPUs. They need new molds, tooling, etc. to manufacture even just the socket itself. I guess this line of thought doesn't work so well when dealing with this industry.
So, there's no way to do this using the current socket/motherboard? My guess is that they do this purposely (at least some of the time) so that users need new hardware for their upgrades. It generates more revenue. I work in the software resale industry and the software vendors pull this crap all the time. (e.g. no backward compatibility forces more users to upgrade so that they can all work together)
It likely uses existing GPS technology. I doubt a new satellite is required. But it likely requires more speed cameras to be installed. Sounds like someone's paying off politicians to boost business for speed cameras..? *puts on tin foil hat*
Yes, I hear they're endangered!
My guess is they'll use some kind of straight-line calculation with compensation built in for taking roads rather than actually driving in a straight line in order to estimate someone's speed. But how can they really prove anything when they have no idea what route was taken and how fast the car actually went? Technically all they're doing is taking a photo of something in two different spots at two different times. There's nothing being done to actually measure speed directly. How do they come up with such an algorithm or calculation? Roads may have different speed limits. Unless they have speed cameras on every single road, there's no reliable way to actually come up with a solid number for their velocity. This is stupid. And I wouldn't be surprised if someone managed to get it tossed into obsolescence fairly quickly.
"Yes, let's force users to upgrade all their hardware when they want a new CPU! Show me the money!"
How the hell did this turn into a post about religion? You are the one who misunderstood my post. Twisting my words into some bizarre, off-topic, religious slant is idiotic and completely misses what I was trying to convey.
My point was that everyone makes mistakes. Do we need to burn someone at the stake everytime a mistake is committed?
And to clarify, that lesson was supposed to convey the exact point I was making. Jesus basically said if the pharisees were perfect they had the privilege of holding themselves above others, justifying their righteous indignation. But they knew they weren't perfect, so the lesson was meant to put them in their place. To make them realize they aren't in a position to judge others, as they're just as sinful as everyone else. After all, every righteous act they performed was really in their own self-interest; basically a sin unto itself.
Now... let's get back on-topic, shall we?
Ever stop and think that maybe another customer at the bar picked it up? It's an iPhone. I'm sure he could've sold a current-gen iPhone for a nice chunk of change to someone, let alone the next-gen iPhone prototype. Or maybe he wanted to return it to the owner until he realized what he had.
Like you're perfect, never making any mistakes or having a lapse in judgment? Give the guy a break and stop being a douche.
"Let he who is without sin cast the first stone." Etc., etc....
I'm not saying the guy didn't do something stupid. But does losing a phone have to ruin the guy's career..? Apple's still going to sell tons of these new iPhones. They'll still make a ton of money. I don't think that this is really going to hurt Apple much, if at all. Give him a stern talking to, a reprimand, whatever. Is the quality of his work worth keeping him? It might be. But I doubt they'll let him test another prototype anytime soon.