Even if Chrome is in beta (and, to be fair, Google "beta" IS equivalent to normal people's "service pack 2"), you are still allowed to say "Firefox 3.5 is superior to the Chrome beta in way X", and that information is useful to people choosing between Firefox and Chrome who care about X.
What is unhealthy is that they are likely to want the real thing eventually. Take for instance the straight male that gets one of these - it may placate him when he gets randy but it is only going to increase his appetite for more.
Why would it? Seriously, I don't think something like that will happen. More likely, we'll get a whole lot of robophiles who will breed themselves out of existence.
Why should it deter? Once the fines go high enough they compensate for the damage the speeder is causing. From there, what's the point in putting them even higher?
What's your legal or moral justification for this? I could understand if someone browsed Street View, saw your house with some, say, MPAA ads beside it and assumed that you supported the MPAA. But otherwise, they're not using your house, they're using a picture of your house. If someone takes a picture of your house, you don't have any rights to that picture.
The problem is most of the expanded civil rights are used the vast majority of the time today to make people go free who are absolutely guilty--the vast majority of arguments about civil liberties are made by drug dealers and criminals, and maybe one in ten thousand are made by honest citizens.
You missed all the times when police didn't trash a person's home because the expanded civil rights would have made the evidence all inadmissible, making sure that there's no point in doing it. Yes, the downsides are much more glamorous, but the net effect of these laws is still overwhelmingly positive.
1) The law leans toward physical property infringement and intellectual property infringement being equivalent? Really?
2) The point of IP law is to encourage people to release works to the public. Using IP to protect information you never intend to release is a corruption of that purpose and IP should most definitely not be used that way.
But I'm still trying to figure out what this story has to do with technology, unless Air Canada is about to employ sensitive equipment that will sense as little as 5 molecules of nut meat within a radius of 50 yards and runs Linux.
There is lots of established precedent for Slashdot caring about physical freedom in real life (or, as the pirate bay puts it, AFK). We have lots of stories about police searches, about airport security and even drug issues. It just happens to be something that the Slashdot community is interested in.
*An aircraft may be privately owned, but it is a public place
No, it's private property. You have no inherent right to use someone else's property, and most definitely not an inherent right to demand that owners of these properties modify them to suit you. With my balancing:
The person with the nut allergy can wait for a flight that specifically accomodates people with allergies or a flight which offers pretzels instead of nuts. The airline company has the sole right to control the environment of a plane that they paid for.
If I ever got fired and was disgruntled, I would contact the BSA regardless of what software they were using. An audit is extremely annoying even if you are fully licensed.
-10 days notice -at most once a year unless you get caught -if you make a minor mistake, you pay up and you're done -if you make a major mistake, you pay up 120% and you're done
Sounds better than anything Microsoft or Adobe have to offer.
The way it's usually done is that the public keys are used to encrypt just the symmetric session-specific key (since public key crypto is too slow to encrypt anything substantial) and then the symmetric keys, which are 128 or 256 bits long, encrypt the actual content. So it's not just authentication, it's the setting up of the encrypted connection that public keys are used for.
Slashdot Mirror
StumbleUpon is on Chrome
Even if Chrome is in beta (and, to be fair, Google "beta" IS equivalent to normal people's "service pack 2"), you are still allowed to say "Firefox 3.5 is superior to the Chrome beta in way X", and that information is useful to people choosing between Firefox and Chrome who care about X.
What is unhealthy is that they are likely to want the real thing eventually. Take for instance the straight male that gets one of these - it may placate him when he gets randy but it is only going to increase his appetite for more.
Why would it? Seriously, I don't think something like that will happen. More likely, we'll get a whole lot of robophiles who will breed themselves out of existence.
It radiates power? So if I stand in its field for a few hours I'll be able to do a lot more work per second for the rest of my life?
-cough- you can say as much as you want between two coughs - they could have even occurred minutes or hours apart -cough-
But if they're only harmlessly having sex with robots, what's so bad about that "unhealthy state of mind"?
It's better than the US system, where the speed limit is "65-85 miles an hour, depending on how the police officer is feeling that day".
Why should it deter? Once the fines go high enough they compensate for the damage the speeder is causing. From there, what's the point in putting them even higher?
So they already beat Google?
My point is that it doesn't matter that it's a "public place". The airline should still be able to manage it as it sees fit.
What's your legal or moral justification for this? I could understand if someone browsed Street View, saw your house with some, say, MPAA ads beside it and assumed that you supported the MPAA. But otherwise, they're not using your house, they're using a picture of your house. If someone takes a picture of your house, you don't have any rights to that picture.
http://digg.com/politics/25_years_murder_free_in_Gun_Town_USA
http://www.propeller.com/story/2007/04/17/self-defense-in-switzerland/
The parent's pet viewpoint is entirely justified.
The problem is most of the expanded civil rights are used the vast majority of the time today to make people go free who are absolutely guilty--the vast majority of arguments about civil liberties are made by drug dealers and criminals, and maybe one in ten thousand are made by honest citizens.
You missed all the times when police didn't trash a person's home because the expanded civil rights would have made the evidence all inadmissible, making sure that there's no point in doing it. Yes, the downsides are much more glamorous, but the net effect of these laws is still overwhelmingly positive.
1) The law leans toward physical property infringement and intellectual property infringement being equivalent? Really?
2) The point of IP law is to encourage people to release works to the public. Using IP to protect information you never intend to release is a corruption of that purpose and IP should most definitely not be used that way.
But I'm still trying to figure out what this story has to do with technology, unless Air Canada is about to employ sensitive equipment that will sense as little as 5 molecules of nut meat within a radius of 50 yards and runs Linux.
There is lots of established precedent for Slashdot caring about physical freedom in real life (or, as the pirate bay puts it, AFK). We have lots of stories about police searches, about airport security and even drug issues. It just happens to be something that the Slashdot community is interested in.
*An aircraft may be privately owned, but it is a public place
No, it's private property. You have no inherent right to use someone else's property, and most definitely not an inherent right to demand that owners of these properties modify them to suit you. With my balancing:
The person with the nut allergy can wait for a flight that specifically accomodates people with allergies or a flight which offers pretzels instead of nuts. The airline company has the sole right to control the environment of a plane that they paid for.
This seems like a pretty good metric for anything.
Microsoft: 288000:369000
43.8% love, 56.2% hate
Google: 1,690,000:153,000
91.7% love, 8.3% hate
The main problem is that a lot of "I love..." statements are actually sarcastic, as in "I love Monsanto, they are so comically evil".
If I ever got fired and was disgruntled, I would contact the BSA regardless of what software they were using. An audit is extremely annoying even if you are fully licensed.
Let's see:
-10 days notice
-at most once a year unless you get caught
-if you make a minor mistake, you pay up and you're done
-if you make a major mistake, you pay up 120% and you're done
Sounds better than anything Microsoft or Adobe have to offer.
2008: Oh no, I forgot my password! I need to call Blizzard for help!
2011: Oh no, I lost my authenticator! I need to call Blizzard for help!
How is it a troll? He's just pointing out that OpenGL makes it easier for people who don't use Windows as their default environment to play games.
2^84 atoms? That's only 32 moles! Did you mean 10^84 atoms?
The way it's usually done is that the public keys are used to encrypt just the symmetric session-specific key (since public key crypto is too slow to encrypt anything substantial) and then the symmetric keys, which are 128 or 256 bits long, encrypt the actual content. So it's not just authentication, it's the setting up of the encrypted connection that public keys are used for.
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes custodium custodium... ad infinitum.
Well, one company is clearly setting themselves up for some big lawsuits in the event of a Google-Toyota merger.