Funny, insurance companies seem to feel differently about whether "testing" human driving behavior *while driving* is interesting or useful. Once built, the car engine/computer should be much more deterministic over the range of driving behaviors/variables that you want to map exhaust to, versus those silly, unpredictable humans.
Is simple: test while driving, and just sample enough cars in enough areas. Testing thingy clamps onto exhaust, stores data, and measures whatever you want to measure, along with other interesting things like, gear, RPM, temperature, location (for congestion mapping or whatever), etc. Maybe you can get some of that info directly off CAN, maybe you have to plug into a diagnostic port and sync time. Whatever.
> Testing emissions outside of laboratory settings is like testing the levelness of a table on a boat at sea. It's much less precise and reproducible.
Which is, well, kinda useless. The levelness of the table is something that's determined by how it's built - an innate property it has. Whether or not it slides around and, say, damages the floor on a boat at sea under different speeds of that boat, wave conditions, and the like is really more like what we're trying to consider with a car on the road.
I know that there are checksums on the download page. We know how to use them. Other people don't.
I don't understand WHY, after all this time, the author(s) continue to refuse to get a code-signing certificate and sign the executable files and the installer. I'm almost assuming that it's on principle somehow, because it's not that expensive and if a request was made I'd bet donations would take care of the cost in under a day.
...it almost seems like everyone is presumed to be guilty of something.
Must we quote Rand again? Regardless of whether you like her or dislike her personally, or agree with her philosophy or not:
We're after power and we mean it... There's no way to rule innocent men....when there aren't enough criminals one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? What's there in that for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced or objectively interpreted – and you create a nation of law-breakers – and then you cash in on guilt. Now that's the system,...that's the game, and once you understand it, you'll be much easier to deal with.
I mean, seriously... I wonder who hasn't committed a felony this year, whether it's paperwork or some esoteric piece of law that no one knows about - never mind the myriad of things that are now "felonies," a term which used to be reserved for serious crimes whereby one could/would lose all property (with/without possible death penalty); once such loss of property was abolished, the distinction between what was and was not a felony became more... flexible.
I really wish someone would bring this up with more serious force behind it. Sun released Java SE under GPLv2.
Also, going out on a limb, I'd guess that the "37 APIs" aren't part of something outside the core stuff - I'm guessing Sun left out J2EE when open sourcing since I see no note about it.
I feel that it goes back to the saying regarding you being the product, if you're not paying.
People don't want to pay, apparently, or just plain don't mind being the product. I don't get that.
The only social site I've found (just recently) where I don't feel like the product would be app.net - sure, not many people might use it yet, but there's potential. They're working with the github model where there IS a free tier, it's just not as nice as a paid tier - and if you really USE the service, you'll probably want to pay the pittance it costs. Like github, use it for free if you want.
As for giving it a shameless plug, sign up using my referral link and we both get more space to store things: http://join.app.net/from/vswpqtxlqq
Get MSDN, or TechNet, or download some ISOs of... anything legit. Then use Steam. You're pretty much done with your 150GB if you download, say, the stuff to set up a virtualized lab configuration worth of software from MSDN, reinstall several games (at 10GB/per - they ARE hosted in the cloud for your convenience, like if you rebuild a computer), and maybe watch some TV on Netflix 3 nights a week night, and some movies on the weekend. It's not hard.
These are NOT "rent-a-cops." Any campus of the UW system that has a police department has a state-certified police force. They are armed and have all the powers that any other city/municipal police department does, including the ability to arrest you or cite you under UW system administrative code or state or local statute, depending on their mood.
There's no such thing as "enough windmills, dams, and solar arrays," at least at current productivity levels. These power sources are NOT price-competitive, and the only way that they survive as well as they do in Germany is via government subsidies. This is NOT a long-term plan.
This really still applies to Windows too, which is why "cleaning" never made a lot of sense to me. I suppose that one could put their trust in the big AV companies, who analyze viruses and note what they mess up/with, but in the end, I have no way of knowing what I just had run rampant on my computer, and so it's far far far safer to just wipe everything.
One might think this could even be written as a nice plug-in style setup for "traffic shaping" on your local linux box. Define 100%, and it figures out how to maximize use w/o triggering the ISP-side throttling.
I'm not sure that it's that they're parasites, it's that like so many other people in the world, they don't want to *think*.
Like a turkey drawn with a child's hand or a collection of snow globes collected from a life well-lived, these sites were hand-made, done by real people, with no agenda or business plan or knowledge, exactly, of how everything under the webservers worked.
Now, the key part here is "no knowledge . . . of how everything under the webservers worked." They presume that it's someone else's problem when the content is gone, but they:
Didn't back it up,
Didn't know how to back it up,
Didn't care to know how to back it up,
Likely told themselves that despite paying nothing, they didn't need to think about it enough to know how to back it up, and that XYZ Corp. was responsible for that.
They expected to receive value despite giving nothing, and then not to have to think at all about what could go wrong if that value were taken away, but instead, that they were entitled to it....and we wonder why we have problems.
Yes, but the problem is that "smacking down the local authorities" is by no matter "easy." They're not likely to, short of the media going ahead and crucifying them in advance, admit a mistake. If anything, drawing attention to yourself tends to make them even nastier.
The only thing that actually seems to get through to them is loss of funds, which, of course, are in fact your funds, and your neighbor's funds, not "theirs." At least when you sue them, though, they notice that the amount of money that they have for playtoys goes down some, and tend to reconsider their bad behavior.
We should point out that this installer/patcher executable was *signed* too, so it runs nicely without warnings about unsigned software (applies more, perhaps, to Vista, where death doesn't follow swiftly after the patch). Another point to Microsoft's "must use code signing" stuff - it's only as safe as your trust of the person supplying it. Now, granted, a lot of people trusted CCP here, but the point is that people really don't have much control over what their computer runs, from anyone. Really, even geeks don't to a point - they may be able to GET the source code for everything, if it's OSS, but they trust that Someone(tm) has looked through it for them, and that it's ok/not evil.
Realistically, there's no other way, unfortunately. We can't all look at all the code for all the stuff our machines do, even if we can get it all.
There's this nasty little concept where, when attempting to prove that you're right in a civil suit, you need to do so by a "preponderance of the evidence," as opposed to the more rigorous "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard used in criminal trials. It's a bit ironic really, since you can lose nearly everything in a civil suit, usually far and above what you lose in a monetary sense in a criminal suit. Ignoring that pesky "federal prison" thing, of course.
But back to "preponderance of the evidence." Basically, they just have to convince a judge that it's more likely that something IS than is not, and they have covered their burden of proof. So if the judge is convinced that it's 51% likely that those files contain what the label (filename) on them says they contain... byebye. IANAL.
As usual, it depends. Microsoft seems to like to think that with OEM versions of Windows, they're licensing it to you on a "per system" basis. As in physical system. With VMware Workstation on that system, you could run 4 copies of Windows, all at once, and still have it be on ONE physical system.
It's down - again, of course - to Microsoft wanting to have their cake and eat it too. They want to license Windows to you on a per-system basis, and prevent you from running it however you want on that one system even if they way that you want to run it is more beneficial to you. To put it another way, they want to charge you BOTH for every copy you run of Windows, AND every system you run it on.
To answer your quesiton, if a judge ruled that a physical PC and VMware instance were the same, legally, it would likely (IANAL) lead to a situation different from what you want, since the judge would have been deciding that your one physical machine may in fact be "x" machines where "x" is the number of Windows virtual machines PLUS one for the physical hardware, and they you would be in violation of Microsoft's license. I think it would be preferrable to have the judge decide that VMware constitutes software running on your one copy of Windows licensed to your machine, and that having it start up another Windows session is merely a software function.
I'm not sure, off the top of my head, what the Windows license says - does it say that you may install "one copy on one machine" or does it say that you may "install it on one machine?" Hehe - then we're back to "does a virtual machine" count as a machine.
I'm getting REALLY tired of the victim mentality that people seem to have ANY time something goes wrong in their lives. Nothing that happens to them is EVER their fault, nor a result of choices they made. In this case, the parents filing suits can't acknowledge that THEY failed to teach, watch over, and ultimately protect their children; it must have been someone else's fault for not doing it for them.
The failure of people to take responsibility for what they do - along with the general sense of entitlement that people seem to have for everything from "free" food to "free" retirement benefits at the hands of the government - is speeding not just their own demise, but the demise of everyone's freedoms. More laws get enacted to prevent so-called frivolous lawsuits, preventing people who NEED to sue from suing, and the government takes more and more money to fund "just one more social program, 'for the children.'"
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah. And just take a look at what's a "felony" these days...
Don't make me replace the whole OS, Microsoft. It'll only take a moment.
Funny, insurance companies seem to feel differently about whether "testing" human driving behavior *while driving* is interesting or useful. Once built, the car engine/computer should be much more deterministic over the range of driving behaviors/variables that you want to map exhaust to, versus those silly, unpredictable humans.
Is simple: test while driving, and just sample enough cars in enough areas. Testing thingy clamps onto exhaust, stores data, and measures whatever you want to measure, along with other interesting things like, gear, RPM, temperature, location (for congestion mapping or whatever), etc. Maybe you can get some of that info directly off CAN, maybe you have to plug into a diagnostic port and sync time. Whatever.
> Testing emissions outside of laboratory settings is like testing the levelness of a table on a boat at sea. It's much less precise and reproducible.
Which is, well, kinda useless. The levelness of the table is something that's determined by how it's built - an innate property it has. Whether or not it slides around and, say, damages the floor on a boat at sea under different speeds of that boat, wave conditions, and the like is really more like what we're trying to consider with a car on the road.
It's really hard to put nails into your own coffin from the outside, but DAmn are they trying.
I know that there are checksums on the download page. We know how to use them. Other people don't.
I don't understand WHY, after all this time, the author(s) continue to refuse to get a code-signing certificate and sign the executable files and the installer. I'm almost assuming that it's on principle somehow, because it's not that expensive and if a request was made I'd bet donations would take care of the cost in under a day.
This should be fun in states where they, by law, have to let non-members purchase alcohol and use the pharmacy...
...it almost seems like everyone is presumed to be guilty of something.
Must we quote Rand again? Regardless of whether you like her or dislike her personally, or agree with her philosophy or not:
We're after power and we mean it... There's no way to rule innocent men. ...when there aren't enough criminals one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? What's there in that for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced or objectively interpreted – and you create a nation of law-breakers – and then you cash in on guilt. Now that's the system, ...that's the game, and once you understand it, you'll be much easier to deal with.
I mean, seriously... I wonder who hasn't committed a felony this year, whether it's paperwork or some esoteric piece of law that no one knows about - never mind the myriad of things that are now "felonies," a term which used to be reserved for serious crimes whereby one could/would lose all property (with/without possible death penalty); once such loss of property was abolished, the distinction between what was and was not a felony became more... flexible.
http://www.javaworld.com/artic...
I really wish someone would bring this up with more serious force behind it. Sun released Java SE under GPLv2.
Also, going out on a limb, I'd guess that the "37 APIs" aren't part of something outside the core stuff - I'm guessing Sun left out J2EE when open sourcing since I see no note about it.
And all these fucking idiots wonder why I don't want children. Seriously?
I feel that it goes back to the saying regarding you being the product, if you're not paying.
People don't want to pay, apparently, or just plain don't mind being the product. I don't get that.
The only social site I've found (just recently) where I don't feel like the product would be app.net - sure, not many people might use it yet, but there's potential. They're working with the github model where there IS a free tier, it's just not as nice as a paid tier - and if you really USE the service, you'll probably want to pay the pittance it costs. Like github, use it for free if you want.
As for giving it a shameless plug, sign up using my referral link and we both get more space to store things: http://join.app.net/from/vswpqtxlqq
Get MSDN, or TechNet, or download some ISOs of... anything legit. Then use Steam. You're pretty much done with your 150GB if you download, say, the stuff to set up a virtualized lab configuration worth of software from MSDN, reinstall several games (at 10GB/per - they ARE hosted in the cloud for your convenience, like if you rebuild a computer), and maybe watch some TV on Netflix 3 nights a week night, and some movies on the weekend. It's not hard.
You should... share the setup you're using here in more detail, and post the XML dump code, etc if you're feeling nice. :) Please?
No. It's not.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strict_liability
These are NOT "rent-a-cops." Any campus of the UW system that has a police department has a state-certified police force. They are armed and have all the powers that any other city/municipal police department does, including the ability to arrest you or cite you under UW system administrative code or state or local statute, depending on their mood.
http://www.uwstout.edu/police/about.cfm
http://nxt.legis.state.wi.us/nxt/gateway.dll?f=templates&fn=default.htm&d=code&jd=UWS
There's no such thing as "enough windmills, dams, and solar arrays," at least at current productivity levels. These power sources are NOT price-competitive, and the only way that they survive as well as they do in Germany is via government subsidies. This is NOT a long-term plan.
This really still applies to Windows too, which is why "cleaning" never made a lot of sense to me. I suppose that one could put their trust in the big AV companies, who analyze viruses and note what they mess up/with, but in the end, I have no way of knowing what I just had run rampant on my computer, and so it's far far far safer to just wipe everything.
One might think this could even be written as a nice plug-in style setup for "traffic shaping" on your local linux box. Define 100%, and it figures out how to maximize use w/o triggering the ISP-side throttling.
Like a turkey drawn with a child's hand or a collection of snow globes collected from a life well-lived, these sites were hand-made, done by real people, with no agenda or business plan or knowledge, exactly, of how everything under the webservers worked.
Now, the key part here is "no knowledge . . . of how everything under the webservers worked." They presume that it's someone else's problem when the content is gone, but they:
They expected to receive value despite giving nothing, and then not to have to think at all about what could go wrong if that value were taken away, but instead, that they were entitled to it. ...and we wonder why we have problems.
Yes, but the problem is that "smacking down the local authorities" is by no matter "easy." They're not likely to, short of the media going ahead and crucifying them in advance, admit a mistake. If anything, drawing attention to yourself tends to make them even nastier.
The only thing that actually seems to get through to them is loss of funds, which, of course, are in fact your funds, and your neighbor's funds, not "theirs." At least when you sue them, though, they notice that the amount of money that they have for playtoys goes down some, and tend to reconsider their bad behavior.
We should point out that this installer/patcher executable was *signed* too, so it runs nicely without warnings about unsigned software (applies more, perhaps, to Vista, where death doesn't follow swiftly after the patch). Another point to Microsoft's "must use code signing" stuff - it's only as safe as your trust of the person supplying it. Now, granted, a lot of people trusted CCP here, but the point is that people really don't have much control over what their computer runs, from anyone. Really, even geeks don't to a point - they may be able to GET the source code for everything, if it's OSS, but they trust that Someone(tm) has looked through it for them, and that it's ok/not evil.
Realistically, there's no other way, unfortunately. We can't all look at all the code for all the stuff our machines do, even if we can get it all.
There's this nasty little concept where, when attempting to prove that you're right in a civil suit, you need to do so by a "preponderance of the evidence," as opposed to the more rigorous "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard used in criminal trials. It's a bit ironic really, since you can lose nearly everything in a civil suit, usually far and above what you lose in a monetary sense in a criminal suit. Ignoring that pesky "federal prison" thing, of course.
But back to "preponderance of the evidence." Basically, they just have to convince a judge that it's more likely that something IS than is not, and they have covered their burden of proof. So if the judge is convinced that it's 51% likely that those files contain what the label (filename) on them says they contain... byebye. IANAL.
As usual, it depends. Microsoft seems to like to think that with OEM versions of Windows, they're licensing it to you on a "per system" basis. As in physical system. With VMware Workstation on that system, you could run 4 copies of Windows, all at once, and still have it be on ONE physical system.
It's down - again, of course - to Microsoft wanting to have their cake and eat it too. They want to license Windows to you on a per-system basis, and prevent you from running it however you want on that one system even if they way that you want to run it is more beneficial to you. To put it another way, they want to charge you BOTH for every copy you run of Windows, AND every system you run it on.
To answer your quesiton, if a judge ruled that a physical PC and VMware instance were the same, legally, it would likely (IANAL) lead to a situation different from what you want, since the judge would have been deciding that your one physical machine may in fact be "x" machines where "x" is the number of Windows virtual machines PLUS one for the physical hardware, and they you would be in violation of Microsoft's license. I think it would be preferrable to have the judge decide that VMware constitutes software running on your one copy of Windows licensed to your machine, and that having it start up another Windows session is merely a software function.
I'm not sure, off the top of my head, what the Windows license says - does it say that you may install "one copy on one machine" or does it say that you may "install it on one machine?" Hehe - then we're back to "does a virtual machine" count as a machine.
I'm getting REALLY tired of the victim mentality that people seem to have ANY time something goes wrong in their lives. Nothing that happens to them is EVER their fault, nor a result of choices they made. In this case, the parents filing suits can't acknowledge that THEY failed to teach, watch over, and ultimately protect their children; it must have been someone else's fault for not doing it for them.
The failure of people to take responsibility for what they do - along with the general sense of entitlement that people seem to have for everything from "free" food to "free" retirement benefits at the hands of the government - is speeding not just their own demise, but the demise of everyone's freedoms. More laws get enacted to prevent so-called frivolous lawsuits, preventing people who NEED to sue from suing, and the government takes more and more money to fund "just one more social program, 'for the children.'"
*rant mode off, flamesuit mode on*
Join us, and freedom from realtime treadmilling will be yours...
http://www.eve-online.com/
Otherwise, give A Tale In The Desert a try.Agreed. F.E.A.R. left me twitchy. I felt the need to go on, but *shudders* it was evil at places.