Steam may be DRM, but they're incredibly smart in that they've made getting and playing content easier than BitTorrent and cracking. Time and time again, people have pointed out that this is the only way to compete with copyright violation, and the success of Steam is proof in the pudding.
It takes Apple much longer to patch released code (and get everyone to upgrade) than it takes them to patch beta code before final release.
Furthermore, this is the first released jailbreak for the iPad 2, and it's a 100% userland exploit that's activated by just visiting a website via the IOS device.
The IOS jailbreaking community is very careful about not releasing exploits for beta versions of IOS so that they get maximum exposure when the release actually happens. If they release the exploit for IOS betas, it's easy for Apple to fix the exploit before code ships.
Actually, solution C generates MORE cars. By spreading out the population into suburban density levels, your reduce the effectiveness of public transit, and you remove the ability to easily walk somewhere. This means more cars have to exist to service the population. That is what has lead to the existence of Orange County and the entire city of Houston.
On the other hand, if you encourage population density, you end up with something like Manhattan or most European cities, where public transportation actually works very well. You end up with far few cars per capita, the streets can be smaller (further encouraging public transit) and multi-use buildings provide residents with the services they need on a daily basis with a short walk.
You misunderstood. The licensed architect takes on personal legal liability that can't be hidden through shell corporations or the like. That random guy you asked to draw you some plans is selling them to you as-is.
If you sue for damages, the burden of proof is on you in the second situation. If you sue a licensed architect for damages, the burden of proof is on them to show they met or exceeded industry best practices, building codes, and local regulations.
There's an additional part you're missing. In most licensed professions, you are taking on legal liability for your work. For example, you cannot call yourself an architect if not licensed. A licensed architect is legally responsible for the safety of the occupants of the building he designs. If the architect does not meet construction code and safety standards, any death or harm to the occupants is deemed his fault. Same thing for civil engineers, doctors, and most licensed professions.
Certain types of engineers are restricted titles (Civil Engineer for one). These "protected" titles require licensing from the state as you are taking on legal liability and responsibility for your work. Architects and Doctors fall into this same category.
No it doesn't conflict. A Use Tax is a tax on ownership and usage of an item, not the sale of the item. Most states set a Use Tax rate that matches Sales Tax, and if you purchased the item across state lines, you can subtract out any sales tax you paid to the originating state. Use Taxes have existed for quite a while, and as far as I am aware, the Supreme Court has not faced a decision regarding them.
Since California has the highest sales tax, it's unlikely you paid as much or more in the originating state (Nevada in the GP example).
The difficulty with implementing Use Tax is that while it is legal, it is almost impossible for the State to collect because it relies on individuals voluntary reporting and is extremely difficult to audit.
No, most management is rightfully scared about dumping money and effort into a potential black hole. Most senior management has seen the mistake of "recommended" software or hardware changes over the years. This is the "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" mentality.
Do you know why MS DOS and Windows prospered and took over the home desktop market? Not because it gave a better experience, but because it was what people were used to seeing and using at work.
Apparently I was wrong about 4 to 5, but at least on OSX the rest of what I said held true. And it wasn't a timer bug as I manually did "Check for Updates". One of my bigger annoyances with Firefox.
Truthfully though, I moved to Chrome a while back. Their auto-update is brilliant and the FF team could learn a thing or two if they're going to copy the agressive release cycle.
Perhaps there should be more onus on the person deleting work than on the person creating it?
Wikipedia editors have created culture of deletion unless you go through obscure, undocumented rituals and procedures that match the whimsical desires of particular editors. That is not a way to induce new people to contribute with new information. That is exclusionary, cliquish and complete antithetical to Wikipedia's stated goals.
That only works for minor point releases. Major releases (3 to 3.5, 3.5/3.6 to 4, 4 to 5) don't show up in the automatic updates. You have to visit firefox.com and manually download and run the installer.
This is the exact situation that caused the print industry to move to InDesign from Quark Express. Quark took their sweet-ass-time making a major version improvement, and when it came out it wasn't backwards compatible. The industry jumped ship to InDesign which had come out and steadily improved over that same timeframe.
You missed the point.... the question further up the tree was
Say a hobbyist wants to run a blog, forum, or wiki, but doesn't want users' passwords and sessions to get snooped with tools such as Firesheep. Can anyone recommend a good CA for hobbyist web site administrators?
If you have to educate your site visitors about SSL certs, and then get them to reconfigure their browser, OS, or install a plugin.... then you've already failed. The fact is that if you want to run a basic site and use SSL to secure things like user logins, then you're stuck with StartSSL, or short-term demos (longest I've seen is 90day). Any server-signing method that doesn't work out-of-box for your end users will just end up turning people away. And from an end-user perspective, self-signed certificates, alternate signing structures, or browser plugins are essentially the same thing: a broken site.
If you have to convince users to use an extra plugin, or reconfigure their OS to support your SSL certificate, then you might as well use a self-signed certificate in the first place.
End users (unless they are security geeks) don't know what SSL certs are, and how to go about "verifying" them. StartSSL was nice in that it could issue certificates that Windows and OSX could trust without any extra intervention by the site visitor.
You misunderstood. Apple has a patent on their particular arrangement of magnets, shielding, and transmission pins. They do not have a universal patent on magnetic-secured power couplings.
Slashdot Mirror
Steam may be DRM, but they're incredibly smart in that they've made getting and playing content easier than BitTorrent and cracking. Time and time again, people have pointed out that this is the only way to compete with copyright violation, and the success of Steam is proof in the pudding.
It takes Apple much longer to patch released code (and get everyone to upgrade) than it takes them to patch beta code before final release.
Furthermore, this is the first released jailbreak for the iPad 2, and it's a 100% userland exploit that's activated by just visiting a website via the IOS device.
The IOS jailbreaking community is very careful about not releasing exploits for beta versions of IOS so that they get maximum exposure when the release actually happens. If they release the exploit for IOS betas, it's easy for Apple to fix the exploit before code ships.
You do realize that the vast majority of subway systems were built long after the city above them?
Actually, solution C generates MORE cars. By spreading out the population into suburban density levels, your reduce the effectiveness of public transit, and you remove the ability to easily walk somewhere. This means more cars have to exist to service the population. That is what has lead to the existence of Orange County and the entire city of Houston.
On the other hand, if you encourage population density, you end up with something like Manhattan or most European cities, where public transportation actually works very well. You end up with far few cars per capita, the streets can be smaller (further encouraging public transit) and multi-use buildings provide residents with the services they need on a daily basis with a short walk.
Adblock was off while I was doing compatibility testing on some sites I am building.
Hmmm... so it's a very basic mashup running on an advertising page for a VOIP server to show how spread out their population is.
And coincidentally, the ad in Slashdot's sidebar is for that exact same VOIP service.
Let me guess, the submitter works for them or is getting compensation from their marketing department?
You misunderstood. The licensed architect takes on personal legal liability that can't be hidden through shell corporations or the like. That random guy you asked to draw you some plans is selling them to you as-is.
If you sue for damages, the burden of proof is on you in the second situation. If you sue a licensed architect for damages, the burden of proof is on them to show they met or exceeded industry best practices, building codes, and local regulations.
There's an additional part you're missing. In most licensed professions, you are taking on legal liability for your work. For example, you cannot call yourself an architect if not licensed. A licensed architect is legally responsible for the safety of the occupants of the building he designs. If the architect does not meet construction code and safety standards, any death or harm to the occupants is deemed his fault. Same thing for civil engineers, doctors, and most licensed professions.
Certain types of engineers are restricted titles (Civil Engineer for one). These "protected" titles require licensing from the state as you are taking on legal liability and responsibility for your work. Architects and Doctors fall into this same category.
No it doesn't conflict. A Use Tax is a tax on ownership and usage of an item, not the sale of the item. Most states set a Use Tax rate that matches Sales Tax, and if you purchased the item across state lines, you can subtract out any sales tax you paid to the originating state. Use Taxes have existed for quite a while, and as far as I am aware, the Supreme Court has not faced a decision regarding them.
Since California has the highest sales tax, it's unlikely you paid as much or more in the originating state (Nevada in the GP example).
The difficulty with implementing Use Tax is that while it is legal, it is almost impossible for the State to collect because it relies on individuals voluntary reporting and is extremely difficult to audit.
See here for more background on the legal theory.
Yes. You are responsible for paying the difference in tax rates when you get back to California. It's called a "use tax".
Right click -> run as admin
Then you don't need to always be admin when using your computer, but still get access to it as needed when installing things.
Hence why I said the other adblock plugin works better. In fact, I find it more intuitive, and more effective than AdBlock Plus is on Firefox.
No, most management is rightfully scared about dumping money and effort into a potential black hole. Most senior management has seen the mistake of "recommended" software or hardware changes over the years. This is the "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" mentality.
Do you know why MS DOS and Windows prospered and took over the home desktop market? Not because it gave a better experience, but because it was what people were used to seeing and using at work.
You don't have to lose it, a version exists for Chrome.
I find this plugin to work even better.
Apparently I was wrong about 4 to 5, but at least on OSX the rest of what I said held true. And it wasn't a timer bug as I manually did "Check for Updates". One of my bigger annoyances with Firefox.
Truthfully though, I moved to Chrome a while back. Their auto-update is brilliant and the FF team could learn a thing or two if they're going to copy the agressive release cycle.
The gray whales didn't migrate away from the North Atlantic, they were hunted to local extinction.
And a single whale does not a migration make.
Perhaps there should be more onus on the person deleting work than on the person creating it?
Wikipedia editors have created culture of deletion unless you go through obscure, undocumented rituals and procedures that match the whimsical desires of particular editors. That is not a way to induce new people to contribute with new information. That is exclusionary, cliquish and complete antithetical to Wikipedia's stated goals.
That only works for minor point releases. Major releases (3 to 3.5, 3.5/3.6 to 4, 4 to 5) don't show up in the automatic updates. You have to visit firefox.com and manually download and run the installer.
This is the exact situation that caused the print industry to move to InDesign from Quark Express. Quark took their sweet-ass-time making a major version improvement, and when it came out it wasn't backwards compatible. The industry jumped ship to InDesign which had come out and steadily improved over that same timeframe.
You missed the point.... the question further up the tree was
If you have to educate your site visitors about SSL certs, and then get them to reconfigure their browser, OS, or install a plugin.... then you've already failed. The fact is that if you want to run a basic site and use SSL to secure things like user logins, then you're stuck with StartSSL, or short-term demos (longest I've seen is 90day). Any server-signing method that doesn't work out-of-box for your end users will just end up turning people away. And from an end-user perspective, self-signed certificates, alternate signing structures, or browser plugins are essentially the same thing: a broken site.
If you have to convince users to use an extra plugin, or reconfigure their OS to support your SSL certificate, then you might as well use a self-signed certificate in the first place.
End users (unless they are security geeks) don't know what SSL certs are, and how to go about "verifying" them. StartSSL was nice in that it could issue certificates that Windows and OSX could trust without any extra intervention by the site visitor.
You misunderstood. Apple has a patent on their particular arrangement of magnets, shielding, and transmission pins. They do not have a universal patent on magnetic-secured power couplings.