... when you are in control of the device's internet connectivity, and can put it behind a firewall and a private-only IP that will permit outgoing access only, similar to a NAT. If that causes the device to behave badly, then the device is already broken and useless. If you want to control the device from outside of your firewall, you can still do so via a secured system that is behind the firewall that *can* accept incoming connections, where any incoming connection to the other system can go through authorization procedures that are otherwise necessary to remotely connect to that system (such as what you might use for ssh, etc).
Everyone shits. Not everyone builds stuff. Although he simply took a working digital clock and put its electronics in another housing to give it a more homebrew look, he did not do so by virtue of following any premade instructions. He figured out his own path to the desired ends, and was apparently spurred only by the desire to build something, even if that thing was not built from scratch. This is *exactly* the same thing that Lego builders experience when they are building something that they have envisioned in their own heads, even though it may be built upon other things that they have already seen, or possibly ripped out of otherwise complete models, and since MOC Lego creations can be called inventions, this clock could also be. That the end result is not technically anything better than the clock that he started out with does not change that.
The 5% figure assumes that about one out of every ten priests who are doing this will actually get publicized. With many hundreds of thousands of catholic priests worldwide, The actual number of clergy who had such illicit behaviour exposed publicly is actually far less than one percent. While there is some statistical validity to assuming that only a minority of cases get reported, this does not extend to how many people might actually be engaging in illicit practices... It only limits the number of reported incidents, not the number of perpetrators
You realize, of course, that the perception that pedophilia is running rampant in churches because of previous reports that made the problem well known is caused by a psychological phenomenon where such reports inadvertently create the impression that the problem they describe is far more widespread than was actually reported because of the sensationalism in the reporting.
I'm not saying that pedophilia isn't bad, and I certainly don't excuse some church's previous attempts to actively cover it up within their ranks, but in actuality it is not any worse in churches than anywhere else. Because of the publicity of those reports, churches are now under far more public scrutiny than they used to be, and most of the churches that practiced in the coverups have since reformed from tolerating it and have many policies in place to prevent a recurrence.
I would compare it more to taking a LEGO model of car with a working transmission that came as a set, taking the car apart and transplanting the transmission into a LEGO frame that you built yourself that shows off the transmission more visibly than the car does. While there's no creativity on the part of building the transmission, it's still a MOC. I dare say there's no small number of AFOL's that would disagree that MOC's are not inventions.
It's not about skill, it's about the creative drive to do it in the first place, and without following any given directions to achieve the desired ends.
... but if you build something that didn't have any instructions, such as a Lego MOC, I would argue that this still loosely meets the necessary criteria for being called an invention.
While repackaging a digital clock may not appear to take much in the way of technical skill to the minds of most of the highly technologically literate folks here at slashdot, truthfully even that is still something that most people would not necessarily think of ever trying to build, or at least not without following some instructions. However small the creative spark might seem here, I'd say that the term invention is still apt.
Indeed. Even if it were true, they clearly don't care whether or not people believe them, and so I don't understand why they would bother saying anything about it in the first place.
The only reason that companies would care what legislators think is either if they are proposing laws that will adversely impact their business model or else the legislators themselves are the company's clients. If the general public has a perception that there is a large piracy culture surrounding Linux and very little legitimate use exists, then companies that care about their image or public reputation, and are wanting to avoid the stigma of appearing to be affiliated with that culture may end up avoiding Linux where they might have otherwise eventually supported it. The only way that you can possibly conclude that this is not a bad thing for Linux is if you think that every company that ever should eventually support Linux actually already does.
Bittorrent has legitimate usage too... but if you are using it, by default you are usually considered to be a pirate. That doesn't stop me from using it for legitimate purposes, but that's only because I don't care whether or not other people come to an incorrect impression about me. Not everyone, and especially not every company, is going to be indifferent about what others might believe about them because of a common public perception.
This is troublesome because if it actually came to pass in that way, then legitimate use of Linux could itself basically be pushed to fringe usage of the OS. This could in turn spur the impression that that the only, or at least primary reason to use Linux, or any open source OS for that matter, is for piracy, much as the impression has already been created that the primary use for bittorrent is for piracy. Commercial entities may then possibly be inclined to steer clear of such open source platforms for fear of being perceived by the general public as somehow affiliated with the piracy culture on those platforms.
Not any more of a hassle than it is to kick people out of a theatre for using their phone. If the rules are clearly posted, then most of the people who don't want to comply won't bother drinking there in the first place. You'd get the odd person who wants to break the rules or who was too lazy to read them... Such people could be asked to leave on a case by case basis.
Or he could, you know, exercise his rights as the owner of the place and kick people out that don't abide by his rules. As long as the rules are clearly posted for anyone who comes in to read, I don't see what the problem is.
You can be evicted from a movie theater for being on your phone during a film, I fail to see why you can't be booted out of a bar for the same thing if that's what the owner wants.
Back in the day you could expect at least 2 or 3 phone stalls in a public establishment such as a bar... often more, depending on its size and popularity.
Plants and algae have nowhere near the efficiency of solar sells at converting light into usable power. Even very cheap solar cells are more than ten times more efficient than plants.
How is chip and pin any less secure than swiping and PIN? The magnetic strip is copyable. Making forgeries of the chip, however, is not so inexpensive.
... banned from downloading, accessing, or otherwise engaging in any internet enabled gaming activities...
This could totally bite for a prior sex offender who has since found gainful employment as a video game developer, since many of the smaller studios I know of have a pretty strong focus on mobile gaming. This law could prevent them from doing their job.
I seriously don't get that... in the country I live in, direct payment is ubiquitous... You insert your card, enter your pin, wait a few seconds for the approval message, then take your card and your good to go. There's also a mode for doing pinless transactions if the transaction amount is under a certain limit (typically $15 or so, depending on the customer and the host bank) which just requires you to tap your card to the pin entry machine.
The USâ(TM)s transition to chip cards has been an utter disaster. Theyâ(TM)re confusing to use, painstakingly slow, less secure than the alternatives, and arenâ(TM)t even the best solution for consumers.
How are they confusing? You insert the card and enter your pin. How are they slow? You wait 5 seconds or so and then you're done. How are they insecure? While only ten thousand pin combinations is not much for a computer to crack, more than a few invalid attempts locks out a card from being used without making a phone call to one's bank and talking to a live human being, and getting them to reactivate the card.
Because if not, I fail to see any significant advantage.
I'm not saying this to be just contradictory to any new development in the energy industry... this is a serious question. If the amount usable energy that can be obtained by the fuel it produces in terms of energy per dollar of investment spent on the technology is not any better than what you can get from modern efficient solar cells then it makes much more sense to use solar power and electricity instead.
Slashdot Mirror
... when you are in control of the device's internet connectivity, and can put it behind a firewall and a private-only IP that will permit outgoing access only, similar to a NAT. If that causes the device to behave badly, then the device is already broken and useless. If you want to control the device from outside of your firewall, you can still do so via a secured system that is behind the firewall that *can* accept incoming connections, where any incoming connection to the other system can go through authorization procedures that are otherwise necessary to remotely connect to that system (such as what you might use for ssh, etc).
It's only a correlation... if there is a causative link, it could very conceivably be in the reverse direction to the one you might be hoping for.
Everyone shits. Not everyone builds stuff. Although he simply took a working digital clock and put its electronics in another housing to give it a more homebrew look, he did not do so by virtue of following any premade instructions. He figured out his own path to the desired ends, and was apparently spurred only by the desire to build something, even if that thing was not built from scratch. This is *exactly* the same thing that Lego builders experience when they are building something that they have envisioned in their own heads, even though it may be built upon other things that they have already seen, or possibly ripped out of otherwise complete models, and since MOC Lego creations can be called inventions, this clock could also be. That the end result is not technically anything better than the clock that he started out with does not change that.
The 5% figure assumes that about one out of every ten priests who are doing this will actually get publicized. With many hundreds of thousands of catholic priests worldwide, The actual number of clergy who had such illicit behaviour exposed publicly is actually far less than one percent. While there is some statistical validity to assuming that only a minority of cases get reported, this does not extend to how many people might actually be engaging in illicit practices... It only limits the number of reported incidents, not the number of perpetrators
You realize, of course, that the perception that pedophilia is running rampant in churches because of previous reports that made the problem well known is caused by a psychological phenomenon where such reports inadvertently create the impression that the problem they describe is far more widespread than was actually reported because of the sensationalism in the reporting.
I'm not saying that pedophilia isn't bad, and I certainly don't excuse some church's previous attempts to actively cover it up within their ranks, but in actuality it is not any worse in churches than anywhere else. Because of the publicity of those reports, churches are now under far more public scrutiny than they used to be, and most of the churches that practiced in the coverups have since reformed from tolerating it and have many policies in place to prevent a recurrence.
I would compare it more to taking a LEGO model of car with a working transmission that came as a set, taking the car apart and transplanting the transmission into a LEGO frame that you built yourself that shows off the transmission more visibly than the car does. While there's no creativity on the part of building the transmission, it's still a MOC. I dare say there's no small number of AFOL's that would disagree that MOC's are not inventions.
It's not about skill, it's about the creative drive to do it in the first place, and without following any given directions to achieve the desired ends.
While repackaging a digital clock may not appear to take much in the way of technical skill to the minds of most of the highly technologically literate folks here at slashdot, truthfully even that is still something that most people would not necessarily think of ever trying to build, or at least not without following some instructions. However small the creative spark might seem here, I'd say that the term invention is still apt.
Indeed. Even if it were true, they clearly don't care whether or not people believe them, and so I don't understand why they would bother saying anything about it in the first place.
Huh?
Did I miss some major news bulletin or something? When did our moon escape the Earth's orbit?
The only reason that companies would care what legislators think is either if they are proposing laws that will adversely impact their business model or else the legislators themselves are the company's clients. If the general public has a perception that there is a large piracy culture surrounding Linux and very little legitimate use exists, then companies that care about their image or public reputation, and are wanting to avoid the stigma of appearing to be affiliated with that culture may end up avoiding Linux where they might have otherwise eventually supported it. The only way that you can possibly conclude that this is not a bad thing for Linux is if you think that every company that ever should eventually support Linux actually already does.
Bittorrent has legitimate usage too... but if you are using it, by default you are usually considered to be a pirate. That doesn't stop me from using it for legitimate purposes, but that's only because I don't care whether or not other people come to an incorrect impression about me. Not everyone, and especially not every company, is going to be indifferent about what others might believe about them because of a common public perception.
This is troublesome because if it actually came to pass in that way, then legitimate use of Linux could itself basically be pushed to fringe usage of the OS. This could in turn spur the impression that that the only, or at least primary reason to use Linux, or any open source OS for that matter, is for piracy, much as the impression has already been created that the primary use for bittorrent is for piracy. Commercial entities may then possibly be inclined to steer clear of such open source platforms for fear of being perceived by the general public as somehow affiliated with the piracy culture on those platforms.
... or were the site creators just going for irony?
How does that become any more likely than it already is, when bars will already evict kick out unruly drunks anyways?
Not any more of a hassle than it is to kick people out of a theatre for using their phone. If the rules are clearly posted, then most of the people who don't want to comply won't bother drinking there in the first place. You'd get the odd person who wants to break the rules or who was too lazy to read them... Such people could be asked to leave on a case by case basis.
That is no more of a hassle than kicking inebriated people out of bars in the first place... which bars do all the time.
Or he could, you know, exercise his rights as the owner of the place and kick people out that don't abide by his rules. As long as the rules are clearly posted for anyone who comes in to read, I don't see what the problem is.
You can be evicted from a movie theater for being on your phone during a film, I fail to see why you can't be booted out of a bar for the same thing if that's what the owner wants.
Back in the day you could expect at least 2 or 3 phone stalls in a public establishment such as a bar... often more, depending on its size and popularity.
Plants and algae have nowhere near the efficiency of solar sells at converting light into usable power. Even very cheap solar cells are more than ten times more efficient than plants.
How is chip and pin any less secure than swiping and PIN? The magnetic strip is copyable. Making forgeries of the chip, however, is not so inexpensive.
This could totally bite for a prior sex offender who has since found gainful employment as a video game developer, since many of the smaller studios I know of have a pretty strong focus on mobile gaming. This law could prevent them from doing their job.
I seriously don't get that... in the country I live in, direct payment is ubiquitous... You insert your card, enter your pin, wait a few seconds for the approval message, then take your card and your good to go. There's also a mode for doing pinless transactions if the transaction amount is under a certain limit (typically $15 or so, depending on the customer and the host bank) which just requires you to tap your card to the pin entry machine.
How are they confusing? You insert the card and enter your pin. How are they slow? You wait 5 seconds or so and then you're done. How are they insecure? While only ten thousand pin combinations is not much for a computer to crack, more than a few invalid attempts locks out a card from being used without making a phone call to one's bank and talking to a live human being, and getting them to reactivate the card.
Because if not, I fail to see any significant advantage.
I'm not saying this to be just contradictory to any new development in the energy industry... this is a serious question. If the amount usable energy that can be obtained by the fuel it produces in terms of energy per dollar of investment spent on the technology is not any better than what you can get from modern efficient solar cells then it makes much more sense to use solar power and electricity instead.