I never asked Windows to update, and it installs the drivers without any user input. therefor I DIDN'T agree to anything. The person/entity you are looking to sue would be Microsoft for forcing me into breaking your contract rules.
Many EULAs have clauses that read something like this:
- the software and/or EULA may be modified from time to time; - your continued use of the software after such modifications indicates your agreement to the new terms; - if you disagree with the terms, you must cease use of the software, blah blah blah; and - certain clauses in the EULA survive after you cease use of the software.
IANAL. but my basic understanding is that you agree to conditions as they are now and in the future, and if you don't like it, your only option is to stop using the product.
The fab cost is too high for a small company to take on. So for now, we are beholden to the Intels, AMDs, ARMs, IBMs, and so on.
There is OpenSPARC, but it lost mindshare to the x86 architecture and is unlikely to be a major player going forward.
I would see an open-source chip dominating if one of the major x86 players got the open-source religion, either because they saw a strategic advantage, or they were forced by other circumstances. But I'm not holding my breath.
Unfortunately research has shown that its not the severity of the punishment that deters individuals from perpetrating those crimes, its the certainty of being caught.
This, in spades.
The severity of the punishment should fit the crime, but beyond a certain level of severity, there is no additional deterrence. That is one of may reasons why the death penalty should be abolished.
He should get a gold sticker for "not being in a nuclear war within a year". Wow, what an accomplishment.
This. Reminds me of those who praised George W. Bush in 2002 and later, for keeping the country safe because there hadn't been an attack... since 9/11.
Exercise for the interested maths nerd: Prove that if q is any even number, then 2^q - 1 is divisible by 3.
Because q is even, we can write 2^q - 1 = [2^r -+1] * [2^r - 1], where 2r = q and r is a (positive) integer.
Now consider the numbers 2^r - 1, 2^r, and 2^r + 1. One of these numbers must be divisible by 3. Clearly it is not 2^r because it only has factors that are powers of 2. Therefore either 2^r - 1 or 2^r + 1 must be divisible by 3. QED.
Or maybe he doesn't want to be assassinated by the loony people you find here on Slashdot in droves, that have blown the Network Neutrality regulations vastly out of proportion.
And maybe you need to supply some examples of "the loony people you find here on Slashdot" who have committed assassinations.
They opened their borders to victims of terror. Can some terrorists sneak in? Of course. But that doesn't mean one can just ignore the human tragedy that's going on outside one's borders. Instead, one screens the people coming in, and tries one's best to keep the terrorists out.
"Incitement" is bullshit. Rioting is a choice. Losing your head to the mob is no excuse. Large groups of people are just as dangerous as any other animal, you should expect the worst when they become agitated, but people do it by choice, either way, the best move is to keep a safe distance.
Riiiight. A stick of dynamite has a "choice" to blow up. It's not my fault if I light the fuse.
If you say something that causes mass panic and could incite a riot, you are behaving in an irresponsible, if not criminal manner.
There once was a man from Nantucket Whose thread had a callback that stuck it An async he coded And stream-buffer loaded And sent it all to the bit bucket
What AHuxley wrote would only upset rabid SJWs, yet you're driven to speak! If you resolve this New Year to ease up on SJWing then maybe the whole year will be fun?
The problem is that people like AHuxley consider anyone with the slightest progressive inclination to be a "rabid SJW."
Indiscriminately sticking extreme labels on people makes it simple to attack them. Simple and wrong.
To the moderators who scored me Interesting/Informative: I was aiming for Funny, but thanks. Yet I'm confused. I feel like you have turned Poe's Law on me.
Just what is a "Real Reporter" ? Somebody who says things you like ?
A fair question. My answer: someone who has obtained a degree in journalism at an accredited school of higher learning, and who has demonstrated a commitment to reporting the truth, based on the standards of the profession of journalism.
TL/DR: those who propagated "pizzagate" were fake reporters. (You are entitled to your own opinions, but not your own facts.)
There are plenty of real reporters who propagate opinions I don't agree with. But I don't question the legitimacy of their reports, as long as they adhere to the principles of their profession: to verify their sources, and to clearly report the facts before they extemporize on them.
What it all comes down to is that you need to have an education to make sense of the news.
You need an education to function in society. And IMHO, you should not need to pay beyond your means to receive it. And part of that education should be the ability to recognize rational, fact-based statements from skewed opinions laced with logical fallacies.
There is a difference between fake news and incomplete news.
This. And I'll go further: fake news is created by fake reporters. It is a deliberate fabrication, intended to enrage or frighten the reader. It is not the same as news with errors or even news with a bias. Incomplete news is still news, but with a disingenuous taint (if done deliberately.)
This is why fact-checking websites (like snopes or politifact) have a gradual scale on which they rate the truth of statements by public individuals, and not just a true/false assessment. The truth is an absolute, but how someone conveys it can be complicated.
there are a lot of people making a lot of money and fame
Who's making a lot of money? If they are so famous, how come you can't name any of them?
The big money is on the denialist side. The Koch brothers made $6B last year.
This. Climate scientists are not making lots of money. They survive on modest-sized grants to do their research. Competition for grants is significant. Not a great way to get rich.
And before the deniers reply with apoplectic rants about how scientists are compromised by their need to compete for research money, let's remind ourselves that science, like all human endeavours, has its flaws and bad actors, but it has adopted a self-correcting discipline that seeks and reviews experimental/observational validation for its claims. Over time, our knowledge of the natural world improves thanks to science. And that happens despite the bad-faith actions of deniers who try to discredit it with false or irrelevant arguments.
Now and then during those 800,000 years (and more) the earth's climate has changed rapidly due to anomalous events. The Industrial Revolution is one of them.
And there we have it my friends. Not only did pirates cause the adoption of the imperial system in the USA, but the metric system causes global warming!Think of the children!!!eleven
Slashdot Mirror
I never asked Windows to update, and it installs the drivers without any user input. therefor I DIDN'T agree to anything. The person/entity you are looking to sue would be Microsoft for forcing me into breaking your contract rules.
Many EULAs have clauses that read something like this:
- the software and/or EULA may be modified from time to time;
- your continued use of the software after such modifications indicates your agreement to the new terms;
- if you disagree with the terms, you must cease use of the software, blah blah blah; and
- certain clauses in the EULA survive after you cease use of the software.
IANAL. but my basic understanding is that you agree to conditions as they are now and in the future, and if you don't like it, your only option is to stop using the product.
No.
I lean towards "not yet."
The fab cost is too high for a small company to take on. So for now, we are beholden to the Intels, AMDs, ARMs, IBMs, and so on.
There is OpenSPARC, but it lost mindshare to the x86 architecture and is unlikely to be a major player going forward.
I would see an open-source chip dominating if one of the major x86 players got the open-source religion, either because they saw a strategic advantage, or they were forced by other circumstances. But I'm not holding my breath.
Unfortunately research has shown that its not the severity of the punishment that deters individuals from perpetrating those crimes, its the certainty of being caught.
This, in spades.
The severity of the punishment should fit the crime, but beyond a certain level of severity, there is no additional deterrence. That is one of may reasons why the death penalty should be abolished.
He should get a gold sticker for "not being in a nuclear war within a year". Wow, what an accomplishment.
This. Reminds me of those who praised George W. Bush in 2002 and later, for keeping the country safe because there hadn't been an attack ... since 9/11.
All primes p are odd, p+1 and p-1 are always even.
Except for 2, which is prime and even.
Exercise for the interested maths nerd: Prove that if q is any even number, then 2^q - 1 is divisible by 3.
Because q is even, we can write 2^q - 1 = [2^r -+1] * [2^r - 1], where 2r = q and r is a (positive) integer.
Now consider the numbers 2^r - 1, 2^r, and 2^r + 1. One of these numbers must be divisible by 3. Clearly it is not 2^r because it only has factors that are powers of 2. Therefore either 2^r - 1 or 2^r + 1 must be divisible by 3. QED.
Millions of citizens
Means nothing. Most people are idiots.
And yet they vote. Does that mean nothing? For better or for worse, I don't.
"_the_most_revolutionary_method_of_communication_used_by_humans,"
I'd present that label to the written word. But yes, the spread of the Internet would be a close second.
I'd put the printed word in between the two, but I got you.
I'm not so sure that ISPs become publishers in this context. More like suppliers of paper, and providers of transport (i.e., the mail.)
TL/DR: IMHO, service-providers must not be content-providers. That is all.
Or maybe he doesn't want to be assassinated by the loony people you find here on Slashdot in droves, that have blown the Network Neutrality regulations vastly out of proportion.
And maybe you need to supply some examples of "the loony people you find here on Slashdot" who have committed assassinations.
None? Thought so.
I'm just curious what the difference between a "fiat decision" and a "non-fiat decision" might be.
In this context, roughly fiat = authoritative.
Parsing it more carefully, I suppose it means a command or decree based merely on authority, without further obligation or justification.
They opened their borders to victims of terror. Can some terrorists sneak in? Of course. But that doesn't mean one can just ignore the human tragedy that's going on outside one's borders. Instead, one screens the people coming in, and tries one's best to keep the terrorists out.
"Incitement" is bullshit. Rioting is a choice. Losing your head to the mob is no excuse. Large groups of people are just as dangerous as any other animal, you should expect the worst when they become agitated, but people do it by choice, either way, the best move is to keep a safe distance.
Riiiight. A stick of dynamite has a "choice" to blow up. It's not my fault if I light the fuse.
If you say something that causes mass panic and could incite a riot, you are behaving in an irresponsible, if not criminal manner.
I was born yesterday, who is this Stanislav Lem??
Learn to work The Google.
Challenge accepted.
There once was a man from Nantucket
Whose thread had a callback that stuck it
An async he coded
And stream-buffer loaded
And sent it all to the bit bucket
What AHuxley wrote would only upset rabid SJWs, yet you're driven to speak! If you resolve this New Year to ease up on SJWing then maybe the whole year will be fun?
The problem is that people like AHuxley consider anyone with the slightest progressive inclination to be a "rabid SJW."
Indiscriminately sticking extreme labels on people makes it simple to attack them. Simple and wrong.
Mary had a little lamb
The doctors were surprised
Old MacDonald had a farm
The doctors nearly died
It can't be worst than poetry written by Paula Nancy Millstone Jennings of Sussex.
She was fictional. This guy was real.
I read it as "What would AI-written porn look like"?
Probably a lot better than the real thing.
To the moderators who scored me Interesting/Informative: I was aiming for Funny, but thanks. Yet I'm confused. I feel like you have turned Poe's Law on me.
Just what is a "Real Reporter" ? Somebody who says things you like ?
A fair question. My answer: someone who has obtained a degree in journalism at an accredited school of higher learning, and who has demonstrated a commitment to reporting the truth, based on the standards of the profession of journalism.
TL/DR: those who propagated "pizzagate" were fake reporters. (You are entitled to your own opinions, but not your own facts.)
There are plenty of real reporters who propagate opinions I don't agree with. But I don't question the legitimacy of their reports, as long as they adhere to the principles of their profession: to verify their sources, and to clearly report the facts before they extemporize on them.
What it all comes down to is that you need to have an education to make sense of the news.
You need an education to function in society. And IMHO, you should not need to pay beyond your means to receive it. And part of that education should be the ability to recognize rational, fact-based statements from skewed opinions laced with logical fallacies.
There is a difference between fake news and incomplete news.
This. And I'll go further: fake news is created by fake reporters. It is a deliberate fabrication, intended to enrage or frighten the reader. It is not the same as news with errors or even news with a bias. Incomplete news is still news, but with a disingenuous taint (if done deliberately.)
This is why fact-checking websites (like snopes or politifact) have a gradual scale on which they rate the truth of statements by public individuals, and not just a true/false assessment. The truth is an absolute, but how someone conveys it can be complicated.
The AGW zealots posted this right when everyone else is too busy shoveling global warming out of their driveways.
Global Warming -> Climate
The stuff in your driveway -> Weather
Learn the difference. That is all.
there are a lot of people making a lot of money and fame
Who's making a lot of money? If they are so famous, how come you can't name any of them?
The big money is on the denialist side. The Koch brothers made $6B last year.
This. Climate scientists are not making lots of money. They survive on modest-sized grants to do their research. Competition for grants is significant. Not a great way to get rich.
And before the deniers reply with apoplectic rants about how scientists are compromised by their need to compete for research money, let's remind ourselves that science, like all human endeavours, has its flaws and bad actors, but it has adopted a self-correcting discipline that seeks and reviews experimental/observational validation for its claims. Over time, our knowledge of the natural world improves thanks to science. And that happens despite the bad-faith actions of deniers who try to discredit it with false or irrelevant arguments.
Now and then during those 800,000 years (and more) the earth's climate has changed rapidly due to anomalous events. The Industrial Revolution is one of them.
We're over 200 comments in, and still no mention of The Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster's revelation that the cause of global warming is the decline in the number of pirates.
And there we have it my friends. Not only did pirates cause the adoption of the imperial system in the USA, but the metric system causes global warming! Think of the children!!!eleven
[Poe's Law disclaimer: yes, I'm kidding.]