There might be some officials out there SAYING those things, but none of them would seriously consider trying to make it happen...it would be political suicide, and they know it.
As long as it's "all for the good of the children" and their opponents can be asked about "why do you want to support terrorists?", all these things will come to pass quite easily.
Note my above post where I point out that 19 Senators voted to censor the Internet and there hasn't been much of a news impact about that at all. If you know anything about our Congress, you know that committees are where the real legislation takes place. So, if those committee members had voted the other way, the bill never gets a chance to be voted on by the full Senate. Meanwhile, the fact that they voted unanimously will sway many other Senators in the final vote, because they wrongly assume the committee members have taken more time studying the bill because it is their area of expertise.
They can do the same with any other corporation they don't like.
There is no indication that the companies you listed weren't "liked", but merely that they did not provide quality goods and services at a reasonable price.
In other words, find examples of very successful companies that went on to fail not because of their direct relationship to consumers, but because of their political affiliations and "out-of-store" business practices.
On the other hand, there are many examples of businesses that are succeeding despite quite a large outcry at their practices, with WalMart being the #1 example. Or, look at how Exxon didn't collapse after the Exxon Valdez oil spill, despite huge negative publicity. Or, how about the MPAA member companies seeing record profits despite treating their customers like convicted criminals?
Anything starting with a 6 uses the same basic technology.
Only if you mean "generally (but not always) uses the same mask size", because that's about the only thing that stays similar on a AMD "series", especially if you compare everything from the Nx3x to the N99x models.
The 69xx series is radically differ from the 68xx series. A small snippet from the Tom's Hardware review:
Whereas the Barts GPUs used to build Radeon HD 6870 and 6850 centered on the same VLIW5 architecture that earned Radeon HD 5870 a place in infamy, the Cayman GPU consolidates functionality into a VLIW4 design, incorporating fewer ALUs per thread processor, but improving performance per square millimeter of die space.
As single cards, they are OK, but AMD was suffering badly on tesselation benchmarks, and the 69xx series was supposed to be a lot better. Unfortunately, a pair of 6850s do better on tesselation benchmarks than the 6970.
With the 6970 MSRP running $10 more than actual pricing on a pair of 6850s, and the real world pricing of the 6970 likely to be higher for a while until demand is met, you're better off with the older cards. Also, if you are on a bit of a budget, the 6850 doesn't suck as a single card, but gives you the ability to upgrade later by adding a card.
Sure, there are effects that are poorly done, but when they're done right, they're not detectable by the average viewer.
The problem is that a very large percentage of CGI effects are poorly done, precisely because they are so much easier to do "mostly right".
For example, the TV show Bones films mostly in Los Angeles, but is set in the Washington, DC, area. There are often shots of the cast in front of various DC landmarks that are obviously green screen backgrounds. This is easily recognizable because the FX artists don't take the time to match the focus and depth of field between the live action and the background.
I'm not specifically picking on this TV show, because this problem exists in the vast majority of such shots, even in multi-hundred million dollar productions (LotR trilogy, for example).
With a large public tracker like PirateBay there are mods and members who weed out and delete the malware, spam, and bad torrents that are on the tracker.
Both private and public trackers are filled with "bad" torrents and malware, and there's usually a lot of spam in the torrent comments.
There are sites with search engines plus private trackers who claim "no malware", yet right in the comments of some torrents there are instructions about running the downloaded files in a VM because of the trojan/spyware/whatever.
The conspiracy theorist in me says that this exactly the idea--kill torrents, not all, just some. From the perspective of most media outlets, the only good torrent is a dead torrent.
Except that the most popular torrents are the ones that media companies most want to shut down: new releases, blockbusters, current TV shows (which would be tricky to win a lawsuit), etc.
None of the media companies really care if people are downloading things like DVDs released 10 years ago, or 25-year-old CDs. For many people, though, those are some of the most important torrents, as you sometimes can't legally purchase the content any more.
If you make 5% and spend 10%, it would take nearly 35 years for the overall payout to fall below that of the "sustaining" model of only paying out what you make in interest. So, the sad part is that they could have sucked up a one-time hit on the principal and still not had any real effect on the long-term viability of the foundation.
Re:That's one heck of a "long goodbye"
on
Goodbye, VGA
·
· Score: 1
Even with the proper USB HID driver, USB is still limited to 6 keypresses at once, while PS/2 will handle as many keys as you can press.
Judging from the issues you're having, I'm guessing that you must be a house cat.
Backward, strafe, jump, and run (or a similar combo) all pressed at the same time isn't uncommon, so there might be instances where 6 or 7 keys are helpful.
ISTR that some games can do two-player from the same keyboard...that might need more than 6 keys at the same time, too.
The benefits of taking action have to weighed against the risks.
Since nobody has a real clue what forces are involved in climate change, and which factors are more (or less) important, any action we take is pretty much a wild-ass guess.
Not that I'm a cynic or anything, but my take is the only safe course is to only perform actions that won't lead to somebody close to a goverment employee having more money in their pocket. Although they are just as risky as every other guess, at least there won't be many people lobbying for the wrong reason (i.e., cash).
For what it's worth, in the situation you outline here, I would agree that a warrant would be necessary. But based on such slim information, I can't imagine it would ever be granted.
Which is exactly my point.
Instead of trying (and failing) to get a warrant, the agent merely writes a bunch of subpoenas and sends them to every credit card company. Since the credit card companies are basically rubber-stamping these requests and sending the info along, if the information given (name, ZIP code, etc.) is enough to match a single account, it's likely the agent would get it. If one credit card company says "we need more information", the agent can use what they learned from the other subpoenas.
The real issue is what else law enforcement is discovering with just a "friendly request" when they really need a warrant. If the accused doesn't have a very good lawyer, they may never know that the information needed a warrant. It's likely the prosecution said "we subpoenaed the information from company X and they gave it to us...we didn't need a warrant because of ruling A, B, and C", never going into the exact details of the content of the subpoena.
If you don't think the fictional worlds are then try commercially publishing a book based in the Star Trek or Star Wars universe and see how long it takes to get sued.
Although you might be sued quickly, it's because of trademark, not copyright.
Paramount learned this the hard way and trademarked the names of every character from Next Generation onward. This is because of the way "derivative works" are defined in copyright law:
A "derivative work" is a work based upon one or more preexisting works, such as a translation, musical arrangement, dramatization, fictionalization, motion picture version, sound recording, art reproduction, abridgment, condensation, or any other form in which a work may be recast, transformed, or adapted.
If you write a story about the Star Trek universe where the only thing you "copy" are the names of things (characters, ships, planets, etc.) and then express a completely new story, it's not a derivative work. Basically, it meant that "sequels" are not derivative works, but court cases have made it so that you can no longer be sure, as it's almost always going to be an question of the individual situation.
If the authorities contact a credit card company, then obviously they know the subject has a card with the company.
Why do you think this?
Suppose they the suspect Zaphod Beeblebrox of some sort of wrongdoing, and believe that knowing what he bought would help. So, they merely send a subpeona to every credit card company for purchase information by Zaphod Beeblebrox. That should require a search warrant, because they don't even have evidence he has a credit card...they just assume, because it's easier than following him and asking every store he visits.
For a less unique name, they can guess the billing ZIP code, or some other thing that might make it look like they have actual information about his credit card. But, this is still fishing that should require a warrant. Unless they have all of the same sort of information required to make a purchase with that card (name, account number, billing ZIP, etc.), then the request is vague enough to require a warrant, but I suspect that no credit card company would fight back and require one.
The moral of this story is that if you ever are accused of a crime and your purchase records are important evidence, then you should contest the fact that a warrant was not used when it was likely needed.
A search warrant would be inappropriate in this situation, because there isn't any doubt that the credit card companies have kept this information.
Unless the subpeona lists the credit card account number and name on the account, then the request should be refused without a warrant, because it's a search.
In other words, if a credit card company gets a request for "all credit card transactions for John Doe", that's a search, because the requestor isn't even sure if John Doe has a credit card with that company.
So, this fellow is costing the US roughly three billion dollars per year. That's a lot of lives that could have been saved, or rapes that could have been prevented, had they been spent elsewhere.
Based on the most recent US statistics I could find, that money would allow you to hire enough police officers at $200K/year salary so that each of them would be responsible for 20 rape investigations per year...and nothing else. That certainly should help.
Although wholesale piracy and counterfeiting (e.g., copying movies and selling them in shrink-wrapped, full-artwork packages) does appear to harm sales, the reality is that these copies are selling to people who cannot afford the legal product.
This usually only happens in places where the legal product is a lot more than an hour or two of a minimum wage job.
The bankers financing the production and marketing of "The Dark Knight Rises" expect a solid return from their $250-$500 million dollar investment.
So did the bankers who financed Ishtar and Knight and Day, both of which were almost certainly pitched as the best movie ever...guaranteed blockbusters with top box office stars.
Nobody has a "right" to make money. Like every investment, you pays your money and you takes your chances.
They get "Tangled."
Which was likely pitched pretty much the same as something like The Last Airbender: guaranteed box office from kids who watch Disney/Nickelodeon/whatever. Remember that every movie is supposed to be either the next Harry Potter (big budget franchise that might hit the top 10 all time) or My Big Fat Greek Wedding (small budget movie that takes the world by storm).
All that said, when X-Men Origins: Wolverine leaked to the Internet before it was released to the theaters, the movie still made money, despite being not very good. There is a great deal of evidence (both anecdotal and serious studies, like the GAO) that show that unauthorized copying has almost no effect on product sales.
You would not believe the trouble I have had suggesting SSH/SCP - even from people who develop on Unix and use SSH to log in all day long.
Sure I would, because sftp and scp are bog slow compared to ftp, while the encryption overhead on an ssh terminal session isn't really anything compared to unencrypted telnet. Also, ssh logins offer a lot over telnet (key-based login, port forwarding, etc.).
All the jury has to do is apply the law that Congress wrote, rather than bad precedents, and it'll be an innocent verdict.
Like that's gonna happen.
17 USC 1201 is the part of copyright law that is called "the DMCA". Paragraph (c) of that section states:
(c) Other Rights, Etc., Not Affected.-(1) Nothing in this section shall affect rights, remedies, limitations, or defenses to copyright infringement, including fair use, under this title.
Despite this, we repeatedly hear that "fair use" is not a valid defense against circumvention.
Also, the only way a trial can be retried over different charges that cover the same actions is if they are significantly different charges (you can't charge someone with manslaughter and then later charge them with murder for the same death. You can however charge them later with robbery if the murder arose from the robbery).
This is a huge "it depends".
Some states have laws where all charges from the "act" must all be charged at the same time, to reduce the costs of trials, and to avoid self-incrimination. Otherwise, you'd have a trial that fails to convict on murder followed by another one that gets a conviction on robbery because the defendant admitted the robbery on the stand.
You can also be tried for the same act by different government entities. The laws might even have the same exact wording. It should be double jeopardy, but courts have ruled that it is not.
The version on iTunes are MP3s made from the 24-bit, 44KHz remaster from last year. Like every remaster for the past 15 years or so, it has dynamic range compression applied.
This results in several things:
People notice sounds they never heard before, because the quiet parts of the songs are now 3-8dB louder than before. Almost every review comments on being able to hear things they couldn't before. In general, you will never hear anything "new" in a remaster that uses the same master tapes (as this one did) that you couldn't have heard before by turning up the volume.
The relative loudness of songs on the same album is messed up. For example, on Sgt. Pepper, "Fixing a Hole" now has peaks about 3-4dB louder than before, while other songs have peaks where they have always been. This is because of the "Loudness War" mentioned in another post. Despite the fact that it's supposed to be a quiet song, quiet songs are now "bad". "Blackbird" from the White Album suffers a similar fate.
Sounds that are supposed to be "big" just don't feel that way. For example, the hammer "Maxwell's Silver Hammer" doesn't stand out as much...it doesn't have as much impact, because it's not as much louder than the rest of the song as it should be. The classic example for this is Phil Collins "In the Air Tonight". Compressed on radio or the latest CD releases, the drum solo has very little impact.
Slashdot Mirror
There might be some officials out there SAYING those things, but none of them would seriously consider trying to make it happen...it would be political suicide, and they know it.
As long as it's "all for the good of the children" and their opponents can be asked about "why do you want to support terrorists?", all these things will come to pass quite easily.
Note my above post where I point out that 19 Senators voted to censor the Internet and there hasn't been much of a news impact about that at all. If you know anything about our Congress, you know that committees are where the real legislation takes place. So, if those committee members had voted the other way, the bill never gets a chance to be voted on by the full Senate. Meanwhile, the fact that they voted unanimously will sway many other Senators in the final vote, because they wrongly assume the committee members have taken more time studying the bill because it is their area of expertise.
They can do the same with any other corporation they don't like.
There is no indication that the companies you listed weren't "liked", but merely that they did not provide quality goods and services at a reasonable price.
In other words, find examples of very successful companies that went on to fail not because of their direct relationship to consumers, but because of their political affiliations and "out-of-store" business practices.
On the other hand, there are many examples of businesses that are succeeding despite quite a large outcry at their practices, with WalMart being the #1 example. Or, look at how Exxon didn't collapse after the Exxon Valdez oil spill, despite huge negative publicity. Or, how about the MPAA member companies seeing record profits despite treating their customers like convicted criminals?
I despise Al Franken, but on this issue, it appears that this *Comedian* certainly has a better grasp on this issue than the *Experts* at the FCC.
Since Al Franken voted to censor the Internet, I don't think he has any better grasp on what true "Net Neutrality" is than anyone else in government.
The scenario above is more likely to apply to SOHO, or to consumer wireless hardware in the home.
I must be buying the "good" devices, then, as every "SOHO" device I own that supports SSL allows you to upload a new key pair.
Seriously, we're talking about less than 4KB of flash memory to store the key pair...what recently-built device can't spare that much space?
Tell them your mother's maiden name is ct!h0Zf&.
Most of these "security" questions ignore anything but [A-Za-z] in the answer and fold case.
So, although you are a bit more secure by not using the correct, searchable answer, any answer that wasn't correct would accomplish the same thing.
Anything starting with a 6 uses the same basic technology.
Only if you mean "generally (but not always) uses the same mask size", because that's about the only thing that stays similar on a AMD "series", especially if you compare everything from the Nx3x to the N99x models.
The 69xx series is radically differ from the 68xx series. A small snippet from the Tom's Hardware review:
There's more detail in the rest of the review.
As for the 6970 and 6950, they are AMAZING deals.
As single cards, they are OK, but AMD was suffering badly on tesselation benchmarks, and the 69xx series was supposed to be a lot better. Unfortunately, a pair of 6850s do better on tesselation benchmarks than the 6970.
With the 6970 MSRP running $10 more than actual pricing on a pair of 6850s, and the real world pricing of the 6970 likely to be higher for a while until demand is met, you're better off with the older cards. Also, if you are on a bit of a budget, the 6850 doesn't suck as a single card, but gives you the ability to upgrade later by adding a card.
Sure, there are effects that are poorly done, but when they're done right, they're not detectable by the average viewer.
The problem is that a very large percentage of CGI effects are poorly done, precisely because they are so much easier to do "mostly right".
For example, the TV show Bones films mostly in Los Angeles, but is set in the Washington, DC, area. There are often shots of the cast in front of various DC landmarks that are obviously green screen backgrounds. This is easily recognizable because the FX artists don't take the time to match the focus and depth of field between the live action and the background.
I'm not specifically picking on this TV show, because this problem exists in the vast majority of such shots, even in multi-hundred million dollar productions (LotR trilogy, for example).
With a large public tracker like PirateBay there are mods and members who weed out and delete the malware, spam, and bad torrents that are on the tracker.
Both private and public trackers are filled with "bad" torrents and malware, and there's usually a lot of spam in the torrent comments.
There are sites with search engines plus private trackers who claim "no malware", yet right in the comments of some torrents there are instructions about running the downloaded files in a VM because of the trojan/spyware/whatever.
The conspiracy theorist in me says that this exactly the idea--kill torrents, not all, just some. From the perspective of most media outlets, the only good torrent is a dead torrent.
Except that the most popular torrents are the ones that media companies most want to shut down: new releases, blockbusters, current TV shows (which would be tricky to win a lawsuit), etc.
None of the media companies really care if people are downloading things like DVDs released 10 years ago, or 25-year-old CDs. For many people, though, those are some of the most important torrents, as you sometimes can't legally purchase the content any more.
Just like the money the foundation lost from the BP oil spill? They lowered their payout they had promised following the American housing and financial crisis and I'm sure it's because they didn't get the money they thought was "already in the bag."
If you make 5% and spend 10%, it would take nearly 35 years for the overall payout to fall below that of the "sustaining" model of only paying out what you make in interest. So, the sad part is that they could have sucked up a one-time hit on the principal and still not had any real effect on the long-term viability of the foundation.
Even with the proper USB HID driver, USB is still limited to 6 keypresses at once, while PS/2 will handle as many keys as you can press.
Judging from the issues you're having, I'm guessing that you must be a house cat.
Backward, strafe, jump, and run (or a similar combo) all pressed at the same time isn't uncommon, so there might be instances where 6 or 7 keys are helpful.
ISTR that some games can do two-player from the same keyboard...that might need more than 6 keys at the same time, too.
The benefits of taking action have to weighed against the risks.
Since nobody has a real clue what forces are involved in climate change, and which factors are more (or less) important, any action we take is pretty much a wild-ass guess.
Not that I'm a cynic or anything, but my take is the only safe course is to only perform actions that won't lead to somebody close to a goverment employee having more money in their pocket. Although they are just as risky as every other guess, at least there won't be many people lobbying for the wrong reason (i.e., cash).
For what it's worth, in the situation you outline here, I would agree that a warrant would be necessary. But based on such slim information, I can't imagine it would ever be granted.
Which is exactly my point.
Instead of trying (and failing) to get a warrant, the agent merely writes a bunch of subpoenas and sends them to every credit card company. Since the credit card companies are basically rubber-stamping these requests and sending the info along, if the information given (name, ZIP code, etc.) is enough to match a single account, it's likely the agent would get it. If one credit card company says "we need more information", the agent can use what they learned from the other subpoenas.
The real issue is what else law enforcement is discovering with just a "friendly request" when they really need a warrant. If the accused doesn't have a very good lawyer, they may never know that the information needed a warrant. It's likely the prosecution said "we subpoenaed the information from company X and they gave it to us...we didn't need a warrant because of ruling A, B, and C", never going into the exact details of the content of the subpoena.
If you don't think the fictional worlds are then try commercially publishing a book based in the Star Trek or Star Wars universe and see how long it takes to get sued.
Although you might be sued quickly, it's because of trademark, not copyright.
Paramount learned this the hard way and trademarked the names of every character from Next Generation onward. This is because of the way "derivative works" are defined in copyright law:
If you write a story about the Star Trek universe where the only thing you "copy" are the names of things (characters, ships, planets, etc.) and then express a completely new story, it's not a derivative work. Basically, it meant that "sequels" are not derivative works, but court cases have made it so that you can no longer be sure, as it's almost always going to be an question of the individual situation.
If the authorities contact a credit card company, then obviously they know the subject has a card with the company.
Why do you think this?
Suppose they the suspect Zaphod Beeblebrox of some sort of wrongdoing, and believe that knowing what he bought would help. So, they merely send a subpeona to every credit card company for purchase information by Zaphod Beeblebrox. That should require a search warrant, because they don't even have evidence he has a credit card...they just assume, because it's easier than following him and asking every store he visits.
For a less unique name, they can guess the billing ZIP code, or some other thing that might make it look like they have actual information about his credit card. But, this is still fishing that should require a warrant. Unless they have all of the same sort of information required to make a purchase with that card (name, account number, billing ZIP, etc.), then the request is vague enough to require a warrant, but I suspect that no credit card company would fight back and require one.
The moral of this story is that if you ever are accused of a crime and your purchase records are important evidence, then you should contest the fact that a warrant was not used when it was likely needed.
A search warrant would be inappropriate in this situation, because there isn't any doubt that the credit card companies have kept this information.
Unless the subpeona lists the credit card account number and name on the account, then the request should be refused without a warrant, because it's a search.
In other words, if a credit card company gets a request for "all credit card transactions for John Doe", that's a search, because the requestor isn't even sure if John Doe has a credit card with that company.
So, this fellow is costing the US roughly three billion dollars per year. That's a lot of lives that could have been saved, or rapes that could have been prevented, had they been spent elsewhere.
Based on the most recent US statistics I could find, that money would allow you to hire enough police officers at $200K/year salary so that each of them would be responsible for 20 rape investigations per year...and nothing else. That certainly should help.
Non-commercial copying, yes.
Although wholesale piracy and counterfeiting (e.g., copying movies and selling them in shrink-wrapped, full-artwork packages) does appear to harm sales, the reality is that these copies are selling to people who cannot afford the legal product.
This usually only happens in places where the legal product is a lot more than an hour or two of a minimum wage job.
The bankers financing the production and marketing of "The Dark Knight Rises" expect a solid return from their $250-$500 million dollar investment.
So did the bankers who financed Ishtar and Knight and Day, both of which were almost certainly pitched as the best movie ever...guaranteed blockbusters with top box office stars.
Nobody has a "right" to make money. Like every investment, you pays your money and you takes your chances.
They get "Tangled."
Which was likely pitched pretty much the same as something like The Last Airbender: guaranteed box office from kids who watch Disney/Nickelodeon/whatever. Remember that every movie is supposed to be either the next Harry Potter (big budget franchise that might hit the top 10 all time) or My Big Fat Greek Wedding (small budget movie that takes the world by storm).
All that said, when X-Men Origins: Wolverine leaked to the Internet before it was released to the theaters, the movie still made money, despite being not very good. There is a great deal of evidence (both anecdotal and serious studies, like the GAO) that show that unauthorized copying has almost no effect on product sales.
Watching those wackos on the history channel conspiracy shows gives me a huge appreciation for rational thought.
Admit it, "they" have gotten to you. What did "they" have to do to ensure your silence?
You would not believe the trouble I have had suggesting SSH/SCP - even from people who develop on Unix and use SSH to log in all day long.
Sure I would, because sftp and scp are bog slow compared to ftp, while the encryption overhead on an ssh terminal session isn't really anything compared to unencrypted telnet. Also, ssh logins offer a lot over telnet (key-based login, port forwarding, etc.).
All the jury has to do is apply the law that Congress wrote, rather than bad precedents, and it'll be an innocent verdict.
Like that's gonna happen.
17 USC 1201 is the part of copyright law that is called "the DMCA". Paragraph (c) of that section states:
Despite this, we repeatedly hear that "fair use" is not a valid defense against circumvention.
Also, the only way a trial can be retried over different charges that cover the same actions is if they are significantly different charges (you can't charge someone with manslaughter and then later charge them with murder for the same death. You can however charge them later with robbery if the murder arose from the robbery).
This is a huge "it depends".
Some states have laws where all charges from the "act" must all be charged at the same time, to reduce the costs of trials, and to avoid self-incrimination. Otherwise, you'd have a trial that fails to convict on murder followed by another one that gets a conviction on robbery because the defendant admitted the robbery on the stand.
You can also be tried for the same act by different government entities. The laws might even have the same exact wording. It should be double jeopardy, but courts have ruled that it is not.
The version on iTunes are MP3s made from the 24-bit, 44KHz remaster from last year. Like every remaster for the past 15 years or so, it has dynamic range compression applied.
This results in several things: