There are a number of nice window-management apps for the Mac, like Window Magnet. Also, don't forget the little green "+" button in the title bar (next to the yellow minimize button). That button is used to tell the window "size yourself to an appropriate size." What is appropriate depends on the app; in Xcode (and probably most apps) this button will make the window fill all the available space (essentially full screen), which is what you want. (In Safari, it'll maximize the height of the window, but won't make it any wider unless the page content is already wider than the window currently is. In Finder, it'll size the window to try to fit all it's contents without scrolling, but no larger.... Whatever the app thinks is the best use of space.)
Yeah I don't trust those three buttons in your window on OS X. They never feel consistent. I've never liked them since OS X came out. I've been using a Mac professionally on and off since 9.something or other back in 1998. Maybe it was 8, I don't remember. Either way, it seems like those 3 buttons in OS X are entirely arbitrary (well the red one hides, but I have keyboard shortcut for that).
OS X has THE worst multi-monitor support in the industry. Without question. I actually broke down and sold my secondary display because it is next to worthless on a Mac. I like to run XCode in full-screen mode (more real estate for dual pane mode). The second monitor is literally just a gray colored paper weight in this mode. Do I really need to use my air-play compatible device as a second display? Not at all. It will still be useless to me.
This comment is a joke, right? I've had dual monitors on Macs since before OSX even existed, and support has always been above par, including now. The only problem I have is that sometimes an application does not understand that there is a second monitor, which is what you are experiencing. Some games do that for me. So how is that the OSs fault, exactly?
No the problem I describe is an issue with OS X fullscreen mode. Not the app. You can see it with all of the Apple apps, not just 3rd party software. I'm not saying you can't do multiple monitors. I'm saying that multiple monitors on Mac OS is worse than it is on any other OS out there. If you're on your second monitor where do you need to go if you need to access a menu item? The primary display. Not everything has a shortcut available. It is most certainly not a joke, the way that Apple handles multiple monitors, however, is.
Really, because I just make my XCode panel as big as which ever screen I'm using. I've not really seen much of advantage of going into "full screen mode" as far as screen real estate is concerned vs just dragging the corner and making the panel bigger.
And I have a 15" MBP with a 27" Acer monitor next to it connected via thunderbolt to HDMI adaptor. The difference in screen real estate on the 27" monitor is barely noticeable vs the enlarged panel to me. Then I keep Mail and iMessage up on the 15" screen.
Guess to each their own...
*shrug* I use the gestures on the touchpad like crazy and I find them to be easier to use in full screen mode than in windowed mode. But yeah using a Dell UltraSharp 27" myself. But on my laptop I dislike having to constantly resize my windows based on whether I am plugged into the 27" display or on the native display.
That's something they fucked up a few years ago with OS X 10.7 and people have been howling about it ever since (and is exactly why I inserted the "(much-needed, IMO)" into my post). Nonetheless, that wasn't so much an issue of multi-monitor support as dumbass full-screen "feature" support; it could be mostly avoided by just maximizing your windows instead of using full-screen. The biggest issue with their multi-monitor support, IMO, was having the menu bar on only one screen. It's been that way forever and has always driven me crazy.
I'm glad to see they're finally fixing all of these issues - which is exactly why I was disappointed with the shitty summary saying "Macs will now support multiple displays, including HDTVs!"
Yeah I know I could manually size my window, but that is just annoying. Especially on my laptop, which I switch between a 27" 2556x1660 display and its native 15" at whatever mediocre resolution it has (I forget these days). It's one thing that I love about Windows 7 that Apple does terribly - the ability to auto size windows to use a specific area or % of the screen with some hot-keys.
We waited a half hour after the end of the keynote for this terrible summary, really? Multiple-monitor support has been in the Mac OS since 1987; the summary doesn't make it even reportedly clear that today's announcement was about (much-needed, IMO) new features for said ability. And "including hdtvs"? Again, this has been possible since hdtvs came into existence (via hdmi out or div->hdmi adapters). The new feature here is being able to use an airplay-cable device as a secondary display.
OS X has THE worst multi-monitor support in the industry. Without question. I actually broke down and sold my secondary display because it is next to worthless on a Mac. I like to run XCode in full-screen mode (more real estate for dual pane mode). The second monitor is literally just a gray colored paper weight in this mode. Do I really need to use my air-play compatible device as a second display? Not at all. It will still be useless to me.
Do tell me, because I'd like to hear an actual argument to this effect, how his revelations threaten much of anything, except the wounded self-importance of the people behind the program...
It is customary to keep the existence of a specific wiretap a secret for a period of time, until the evidence has been gathered and is ready for use. The logic here is obvious: If wiretap orders were public, John Smith could just check the daily wiretaps RSS feed and determine whether he is being listened to, thus destroying the value of the wiretap.
The argument is actually pretty obvious; if you are plotting something that the NSA wants to know about, and you know that they have free and clear access to X providers, you simply avoid communicating via X providers when relaying details of your plot. Intent on good or evil, a US citizen who has not given up enough details of his intent to qualify for a warrant could, theoretically, count on the protection of the fourth amendment to avoid detection. Of course, this argument runs contrary to the fourth amendment because that is what it is supposed to do. The argument is clear, it's just not the one we want to hear.
Good luck. You simply cannot communicate in the US without some or all of your traffic going through one of those service providers. Want to make a landline/cell call? Nope. They're on that. VoIP call? Nope they've got all that tapped too. Your only choices are snail mail and short-wave radio. Sure you could encrypt your voice and data transmissions, but I'd be surprised if they weren't doing that already.
Why don't we prosecute unsafe/elderly drivers? That would save far more lives and not risk loss of freedom.
Hell, I would be happy if they would just take their driver's licenses away! I was almost killed by an old lady on Saturday while out on my motorcycle. She made an unprotected left turn in front of me and then STOPPED across all lanes of traffic because she decided it wasn't safe to complete her turn. Being the paranoid rider that I am, I watched her all the way out of the parking lot she was in. She never once looked to the left before completing her turn. Not once. After coming to an emergency stop, I laid on my horn and the lady couldn't hear it (I was less than 5 feet from her driver's side window by the time I completed my stop). She can't hear and she doesn't know what the hell to do on the road anymore.
Those kind of people should not be driving. I pray that when I reach that age, I have the wisdom to recognize my body and mind are just not up to operating dangerous machinery in the presence of large groups of traffic.
I think the bigger issue missed here is that rentals are simply no longer possible with Xbox One.
Microsoft has killed the game rental market in one fell swoop.
Personally, I think this is a dumb move... I've bought many games after trying them out as rentals; I doubt I am alone with that practice. That is a lot of potential marketing tossed down the toilet.
Even if the used game market survives (though I doubt it will ever be a factor again), the rental market is gone, gone,gone.
I was under the impression that they were going to have special signing keys that allowed you to make a game a rental unit. It'll be like how VHS tapes were - you pay a huge premium to buy a rental version of the disc. I could be wrong, though. I don't remember where I heard this.
Considering I was being paid $20 an hour and when the company I was working for charged $95 an hour. I do believe that there is a problem.
$95/hr is split into:
Your $20/hr + (Plus any benefits, Federal taxes, blah, blah)
Plus the time that someone spent getting that client you just did $95 worth of work for
Plus the money that was spent marketing to get that client you just did $95 worth of work for
Plus the admin time that will be spent billing that client
Plus dealing with the clients that don't pay
Plus office rent, utilities, other office overhead that you probably have no clue about
Plus tools used to perform the work (ticketing system, remote access tools?) . Again, you probably have no clue how much that actually costs
Plus you were paid to drive to that client, and if using your own vehicle should have gotten mileage
In addition to the drive, you are likely not billing 100% of your time anyway - Company still pays you when you are not billable right?
Believe it or not, the Margin on those accounts is not that much. Does it make money? Well I hope so or your company will no longer exist - Does it make someone filthy rich? Probably not.
This is spot on. I used to do estimates and proposals for Government contracts that were required to be billed in a Cost Plus Fixed Fee format. That meant that your costs better line up with what you put on the paperwork or you could lose your contract and get hit with some fines. For the geographical area this company was located in legitimate costs were about 3x what each employee's hourly wage was. And that did NOT include any other employee overhead except for HR. There was time allocated for administration, billing, etc.
What we need is central industry DB that a stolen phone is registered to. Once registered to this DB no carrier in US would allow on their network.
Apple, Google, Blackbery would ban these devices from their servers also.
You could have stopped right there. That alone would have negated a lot of the incentive of stealing phones in the first place.
If anyone buys a phone without checking and later it is found to have been slolden then they get to share in the charges from the person who committed crime. If he killed or maimed they get charges as accessories.
That rings far too much like "guilty until proven innocent".
It's stolen property... handle it identically to that. The possessor surrenders it to the authorities at their own expense.
Note that, in most jurisdictions, possession of stolen property IS a crime, regardless of whether or not you actually know that the property is stolen. If the DA is very busy, or honestly believes that you did not knowingly purchase stolen property, you will just lose said property. If they think you should have known, you may very well be faced with criminal charges.
$Phonemaker does nothing, tons of phones get stolen, $Phonemaker makes tons of replacement phones (i.e. tons of money)..
Or
$Phonemaker makes a used phone useless, no phones get stolen and $Phonemaker loses tons of money in lost replacement phone revenue.
Can you explain how each phone stolen is "marginal", as opposed to 100%, gain? Basically, if they do nothing they find money for zero work. This model dictates exactly what they should do -- absolutely nothing. No wonder they are having a big pow-wow about it. Might need to have annual meetings even.
How about the fact that the person stealing the phone now has to buy said phone themselves? Or more likely, the person buying said stolen phone must pay the actual cash value of the phone instead of buying one that fell off the back of a truck.
At least I can get way more shit done if I have a context change between leisure and work.
Well certainly if you have young kids / nagging spouse then it can be difficult to concentrate at home. For my context switch I always make sure that I get up and get ready, just like I was going to go to work. I don't have a TV anywhere near my work area, and avoid having other distracting things in that area. If that is what s/he is looking for is a context switch, then that makes sense. I still think this portable monitor thing is silly. Maybe he should start a business of a co-working facility that supplies fast internet and great monitors for those road warriors who need a temporary place to work in Austin?;)
Why exactly do you need this? This sounds like a waste. I work from home every single day of the week an have a nice Dell Ultra Sharp 27" display at 2556xwhatever. It's wonderful. And if I want to socialize, I go out with my friends. What does this co-working facility offer exactly?
Once upon a time I worked on things like tracking a moving object from a gimbal mounted camera which was attached to the nose of another moving object (a helicopter tracking ground targets). That involved a hell of a lot of complex math, mostly linear algebra with a lot of trig. Those math classes sure came in handy. I would have been dead in the water without them.
I've also worked in the digital video industry and used transformations and matrices to manipulate overlays on video. High school trig was sufficient for that particular job. I've probably spent less than 2 man years doing complex math in my entire 10+ year career. When you need that sort of math, you really need it. But most of the time, it doesn't really matter. It's just good to learn how to solve all those more abstract problems that come up in higher level math
We already do: murder, rape, theft, and other such things are illegal. They likely wouldn't be if most people had no problems with them (if we even had a society in such circumstances).
That is the most asinine thing I have read all day. Murder, rape, and theft all violate the rights mentioned in the Declaration of Independence: Namely the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. You have no right to deprive people of their ability to decide who they have sex with, whether someone else gets to live or die, or whether or not they get to keep their property. Your rights end where mine begin.
It's more of a 'their tourist trap, their rules' sort of thing.
Complaining about the rules of a country(which, even in theoretically democratic and whatnot locations, can get rather unpleasant rather fast and can be a forceful imposition on a fair chunk of the citizenry) is a perfectly valid passtime. And, Nepal is hardly a poster child for high-quality governance services.
Everest, though, is basically a high-altitude theme park. They charge admission(it's called a 'permit'; but it's essentially an 'Admit one to scenic Mount Everest' ticket), and the various concession stands have their own offerings on tap. Gosh, how horrid and shocking. Now they want to deny admission to somebody who didn't pay to have his picture taken at one of the photo kiosks. What a banal little dispute.
Honestly, I don't think you are appreciating the dangers of climbing Mount Everest. It is not an easy or safe climb. If I were in charge of it, I would want to impose a fee on all visitors, too. If someone gets halfway up to the top and needs help, who foots the bill? The Nepal government. It's a serious hike and if charging a fee helps people understand that it is a serious hike, I'm all for it. How often do you hear about people activating emergency beacons in the US because they didn't pack enough water for themselves? Its for this same reason that the Nepal government requires you to hire local sherpas to take you up the mountain, too. You're much less likely to run into these emergency situations with an experienced hiker.
Finally, the law states you cannot broadcast without a permit. End of story. He didn't get one, he can't be on BBC. I highly doubt the law specifies how the broadcast is carried out. Again there are many legitimate reasons for such a fee. For instance, without a fee you may have thousands of reporters flock to Everest and cause extra damage to the mountain. By charging a relatively small fee ($2000 is nothing for most news organizations), you encourage those news agencies to share reporting assets, decreasing the number of people on the mountain side. That decreases the risk of injury or emergency, and probably lowers the overall S&R costs of the Nepalese government all while reducing the environmental impact on the mountain itself.
The biggest battery drain on my phone is always the display, followed by "Cell standby". How is a CPU and chipset able to promise a 50% increase in battery life when it's not even the biggest power user in the phone?
I would guess that you suffered a brief lapse in reading comprehension. My take on this is that the Haswell uses 50% less power for the same performance / capability as an Ivy Bridge. Whether or not that cuts battery consumption overall by 50%... well I highly doubt it.
You can't take your tier one support call into court unless you recorded it.
I was wondering about this. Is it always legal to record such calls if you are yourself informed that the call is being recorded by the other party?
Most states require both parties to be aware that the recording is taking place. Since most of those places inform you that the call is being recorded when you call in, you can record the call legally. I would start the recording from the warning on. And I actually have some SIP software that will play a tone every 5 seconds to make sure all parties know it is recording (quite handy if you're going to record calls). In any event, for extra safety, it doesn't hurt to remind the person that they are being recorded when you finally get them on the line.
This is because snail mail is often used (still, amazingly) for important things for which they have to respond.
This doesn't surprise me at all. Why I just used snail mail on Monday to send a letter informing a management company that they were in breach of contract and that they had 7 days (by state law) to rectify the situation or they would be legally responsible for all sorts of damages, blah blah blah. Anyway. I had been calling and complaining (and even showing up in person) to said management company for 20 days and they did nothing. It wasn't until I filled out a form to file in court and sent it certified mail that they did anything. And let me tell you, they did something to rectify the breach that very day. Why? Because I had a little stamped piece of paper from the post office saying that they most certainly hand delivered my notice of breach of contract and the court system absolutely loves signed receipts. You can take your piece of paper (the one you sent, and the one you received) in and show a judge. You can't take your tier one support call into court unless you recorded it. Even then a tier 1 support person is probably not likely to get the company into as much hot water as a letter.
AT&T would be required to let customers out of their contracts without an early termination fee if it raised prices, but it is avoiding this by simply calling the increase a 'surcharge'
I love the way there's always a loophole!
The only reason this loophole works is because most people are too lazy to go through the effort required to rectify this $0.61 a month issue. Honestly, I don't blame them. If I were sufficiently interested in a problem like this (I'm not, I don't even have a cell phone contract), I would take AT&T Mobility to Small Claims court for breach of contract. I'd ask for damages and for them to pay me an early termination fee for having to deal with the headache of this issue. If thousands of customers did this, I think AT&T would just remove the fee entirely.
They are the ones setting up the mayor and the ones selling the video. Regardless of the authenticity if the government enticed you into breaking the law and filmed it, it's called entrapment which is inadmissible as evidence. However if some enterprising drug dealers entice you into breaking the law and film it somehow it's okay.
No, you are perhaps thinking of blackmail. Only the government can entrap you. Only the government can violate your 4th amendment rights. If I were to call and tell the police that I broke into your house and found a dozen sex slaves in your mom's basement, the police could obtain a warrant, search the house and arrest you. If I steal a gun you've used to commit a crime and turn it over to police with your fingerprints on it, they can use it in court against you. It is only inadmissible if the government did it, or if someone did it at the behest of the government or an agent of the government. I could also video tape you doing anything at any time, even if I am breaking the law by taping you and it could be admitted as evidence against you.
But to be a useful one-time pad, don't you have to be able to repeat the results to decode the message?
No. With a proper random pad generation algorithm, you could never ever reproduce the exact same pad in two places, or at two separate times. You generate the pad once and use some other method (such as couriers) to deliver the pads to the people that need them. You also need a way to guarantee that the courier did not tamper with, sell, or copy the original pad. If you transmit via internet, you would use some previously arranged cryptographic exchange.
Looks like the Xbox One is a home-entertainment center for which gaming is mostly an afterthought.
That's not necessarily a bad thing (hardcore gamers aren't nearly as important of a demographic as they think), but a lack of focus could be a real problem. We already have general-purpose machines that are versatile enough to do what we want them to. Microsoft needs to make the case why this is better than a laptop or a tablet or a smartphone – especially as it is certain to be loaded down with DRM.
This is exactly how the XBox 360 is now. You can do NetFlix, Amazon Video, ESPN3, etc. Now its going to be better integrated into the main OS, I would imagine.
There are two parts to the whole "3D printed gun debate" that I've heard people spouting....
B) I can print an untraceable metal-less gun
A... is pointless because as you say it was always possible to make a cheap gun from common parts. Especially when it doesn't have to be particularly re-usable or reliable or accurate.
B... is kind of an issue. Some thug needs a burner gun for just one or two shots and he can dispose of it or melt it down. Granted, I guess it could always have been done with PVC piping and a 22, but this was does make it more convenient.
B Is not even remotely possible. You need a metal firing pin, and probably a few other metal pieces unless you want a single action revolver. While some metal detectors do not pick up my leather belt + metal belt buckle (normal one, not country style), most do. Sure you can print a burner gun but may still have difficulty by-passing security with it.
People being rational don't murder. Gun control is about limiting the ease with which someone can engage in irrational acts.
Ok so gun control stops some irrational people that don't already have a gun. Those that don't know someone on the street that would be happy to sell them one for the right price. I've never used recreational drugs in my life, but I guarantee you that I could score just about any one I wanted within 3 phone calls. I'd be willing to bet at least one of those 3 people would know someone who would sell me a gun on the spot, no questions asked, too.
Slashdot Mirror
There are a number of nice window-management apps for the Mac, like Window Magnet. Also, don't forget the little green "+" button in the title bar (next to the yellow minimize button). That button is used to tell the window "size yourself to an appropriate size." What is appropriate depends on the app; in Xcode (and probably most apps) this button will make the window fill all the available space (essentially full screen), which is what you want. (In Safari, it'll maximize the height of the window, but won't make it any wider unless the page content is already wider than the window currently is. In Finder, it'll size the window to try to fit all it's contents without scrolling, but no larger. ... Whatever the app thinks is the best use of space.)
Yeah I don't trust those three buttons in your window on OS X. They never feel consistent. I've never liked them since OS X came out. I've been using a Mac professionally on and off since 9.something or other back in 1998. Maybe it was 8, I don't remember. Either way, it seems like those 3 buttons in OS X are entirely arbitrary (well the red one hides, but I have keyboard shortcut for that).
OS X has THE worst multi-monitor support in the industry. Without question. I actually broke down and sold my secondary display because it is next to worthless on a Mac. I like to run XCode in full-screen mode (more real estate for dual pane mode). The second monitor is literally just a gray colored paper weight in this mode. Do I really need to use my air-play compatible device as a second display? Not at all. It will still be useless to me.
This comment is a joke, right? I've had dual monitors on Macs since before OSX even existed, and support has always been above par, including now. The only problem I have is that sometimes an application does not understand that there is a second monitor, which is what you are experiencing. Some games do that for me. So how is that the OSs fault, exactly?
No the problem I describe is an issue with OS X fullscreen mode. Not the app. You can see it with all of the Apple apps, not just 3rd party software. I'm not saying you can't do multiple monitors. I'm saying that multiple monitors on Mac OS is worse than it is on any other OS out there. If you're on your second monitor where do you need to go if you need to access a menu item? The primary display. Not everything has a shortcut available. It is most certainly not a joke, the way that Apple handles multiple monitors, however, is.
Really, because I just make my XCode panel as big as which ever screen I'm using. I've not really seen much of advantage of going into "full screen mode" as far as screen real estate is concerned vs just dragging the corner and making the panel bigger.
And I have a 15" MBP with a 27" Acer monitor next to it connected via thunderbolt to HDMI adaptor. The difference in screen real estate on the 27" monitor is barely noticeable vs the enlarged panel to me. Then I keep Mail and iMessage up on the 15" screen.
Guess to each their own...
*shrug* I use the gestures on the touchpad like crazy and I find them to be easier to use in full screen mode than in windowed mode. But yeah using a Dell UltraSharp 27" myself. But on my laptop I dislike having to constantly resize my windows based on whether I am plugged into the 27" display or on the native display.
That's something they fucked up a few years ago with OS X 10.7 and people have been howling about it ever since (and is exactly why I inserted the "(much-needed, IMO)" into my post). Nonetheless, that wasn't so much an issue of multi-monitor support as dumbass full-screen "feature" support; it could be mostly avoided by just maximizing your windows instead of using full-screen. The biggest issue with their multi-monitor support, IMO, was having the menu bar on only one screen. It's been that way forever and has always driven me crazy. I'm glad to see they're finally fixing all of these issues - which is exactly why I was disappointed with the shitty summary saying "Macs will now support multiple displays, including HDTVs!"
Yeah I know I could manually size my window, but that is just annoying. Especially on my laptop, which I switch between a 27" 2556x1660 display and its native 15" at whatever mediocre resolution it has (I forget these days). It's one thing that I love about Windows 7 that Apple does terribly - the ability to auto size windows to use a specific area or % of the screen with some hot-keys.
We waited a half hour after the end of the keynote for this terrible summary, really? Multiple-monitor support has been in the Mac OS since 1987; the summary doesn't make it even reportedly clear that today's announcement was about (much-needed, IMO) new features for said ability. And "including hdtvs"? Again, this has been possible since hdtvs came into existence (via hdmi out or div->hdmi adapters). The new feature here is being able to use an airplay-cable device as a secondary display.
OS X has THE worst multi-monitor support in the industry. Without question. I actually broke down and sold my secondary display because it is next to worthless on a Mac. I like to run XCode in full-screen mode (more real estate for dual pane mode). The second monitor is literally just a gray colored paper weight in this mode. Do I really need to use my air-play compatible device as a second display? Not at all. It will still be useless to me.
Do tell me, because I'd like to hear an actual argument to this effect, how his revelations threaten much of anything, except the wounded self-importance of the people behind the program...
It is customary to keep the existence of a specific wiretap a secret for a period of time, until the evidence has been gathered and is ready for use. The logic here is obvious: If wiretap orders were public, John Smith could just check the daily wiretaps RSS feed and determine whether he is being listened to, thus destroying the value of the wiretap.
The argument is actually pretty obvious; if you are plotting something that the NSA wants to know about, and you know that they have free and clear access to X providers, you simply avoid communicating via X providers when relaying details of your plot. Intent on good or evil, a US citizen who has not given up enough details of his intent to qualify for a warrant could, theoretically, count on the protection of the fourth amendment to avoid detection. Of course, this argument runs contrary to the fourth amendment because that is what it is supposed to do. The argument is clear, it's just not the one we want to hear.
Good luck. You simply cannot communicate in the US without some or all of your traffic going through one of those service providers. Want to make a landline/cell call? Nope. They're on that. VoIP call? Nope they've got all that tapped too. Your only choices are snail mail and short-wave radio. Sure you could encrypt your voice and data transmissions, but I'd be surprised if they weren't doing that already.
So still less people than car accidents?
Why don't we prosecute unsafe/elderly drivers? That would save far more lives and not risk loss of freedom.
Hell, I would be happy if they would just take their driver's licenses away! I was almost killed by an old lady on Saturday while out on my motorcycle. She made an unprotected left turn in front of me and then STOPPED across all lanes of traffic because she decided it wasn't safe to complete her turn. Being the paranoid rider that I am, I watched her all the way out of the parking lot she was in. She never once looked to the left before completing her turn. Not once. After coming to an emergency stop, I laid on my horn and the lady couldn't hear it (I was less than 5 feet from her driver's side window by the time I completed my stop). She can't hear and she doesn't know what the hell to do on the road anymore.
Those kind of people should not be driving. I pray that when I reach that age, I have the wisdom to recognize my body and mind are just not up to operating dangerous machinery in the presence of large groups of traffic.
I think the bigger issue missed here is that rentals are simply no longer possible with Xbox One.
Microsoft has killed the game rental market in one fell swoop.
Personally, I think this is a dumb move... I've bought many games after trying them out as rentals; I doubt I am alone with that practice. That is a lot of potential marketing tossed down the toilet.
Even if the used game market survives (though I doubt it will ever be a factor again), the rental market is gone, gone,gone.
I was under the impression that they were going to have special signing keys that allowed you to make a game a rental unit. It'll be like how VHS tapes were - you pay a huge premium to buy a rental version of the disc. I could be wrong, though. I don't remember where I heard this.
Considering I was being paid $20 an hour and when the company I was working for charged $95 an hour. I do believe that there is a problem.
$95/hr is split into: Your $20/hr + (Plus any benefits, Federal taxes, blah, blah) Plus the time that someone spent getting that client you just did $95 worth of work for Plus the money that was spent marketing to get that client you just did $95 worth of work for Plus the admin time that will be spent billing that client Plus dealing with the clients that don't pay Plus office rent, utilities, other office overhead that you probably have no clue about Plus tools used to perform the work (ticketing system, remote access tools?) . Again, you probably have no clue how much that actually costs Plus you were paid to drive to that client, and if using your own vehicle should have gotten mileage In addition to the drive, you are likely not billing 100% of your time anyway - Company still pays you when you are not billable right? Believe it or not, the Margin on those accounts is not that much. Does it make money? Well I hope so or your company will no longer exist - Does it make someone filthy rich? Probably not.
This is spot on. I used to do estimates and proposals for Government contracts that were required to be billed in a Cost Plus Fixed Fee format. That meant that your costs better line up with what you put on the paperwork or you could lose your contract and get hit with some fines. For the geographical area this company was located in legitimate costs were about 3x what each employee's hourly wage was. And that did NOT include any other employee overhead except for HR. There was time allocated for administration, billing, etc.
You could have stopped right there. That alone would have negated a lot of the incentive of stealing phones in the first place.
That rings far too much like "guilty until proven innocent".
It's stolen property... handle it identically to that. The possessor surrenders it to the authorities at their own expense.
Note that, in most jurisdictions, possession of stolen property IS a crime, regardless of whether or not you actually know that the property is stolen. If the DA is very busy, or honestly believes that you did not knowingly purchase stolen property, you will just lose said property. If they think you should have known, you may very well be faced with criminal charges.
$Phonemaker does nothing, tons of phones get stolen, $Phonemaker makes tons of replacement phones (i.e. tons of money). .
Or
$Phonemaker makes a used phone useless, no phones get stolen and $Phonemaker loses tons of money in lost replacement phone revenue.
Can you explain how each phone stolen is "marginal", as opposed to 100%, gain? Basically, if they do nothing they find money for zero work. This model dictates exactly what they should do -- absolutely nothing. No wonder they are having a big pow-wow about it. Might need to have annual meetings even.
How about the fact that the person stealing the phone now has to buy said phone themselves? Or more likely, the person buying said stolen phone must pay the actual cash value of the phone instead of buying one that fell off the back of a truck.
At least I can get way more shit done if I have a context change between leisure and work.
Well certainly if you have young kids / nagging spouse then it can be difficult to concentrate at home. For my context switch I always make sure that I get up and get ready, just like I was going to go to work. I don't have a TV anywhere near my work area, and avoid having other distracting things in that area. If that is what s/he is looking for is a context switch, then that makes sense. I still think this portable monitor thing is silly. Maybe he should start a business of a co-working facility that supplies fast internet and great monitors for those road warriors who need a temporary place to work in Austin? ;)
Why exactly do you need this? This sounds like a waste. I work from home every single day of the week an have a nice Dell Ultra Sharp 27" display at 2556xwhatever. It's wonderful. And if I want to socialize, I go out with my friends. What does this co-working facility offer exactly?
Once upon a time I worked on things like tracking a moving object from a gimbal mounted camera which was attached to the nose of another moving object (a helicopter tracking ground targets). That involved a hell of a lot of complex math, mostly linear algebra with a lot of trig. Those math classes sure came in handy. I would have been dead in the water without them.
I've also worked in the digital video industry and used transformations and matrices to manipulate overlays on video. High school trig was sufficient for that particular job. I've probably spent less than 2 man years doing complex math in my entire 10+ year career. When you need that sort of math, you really need it. But most of the time, it doesn't really matter. It's just good to learn how to solve all those more abstract problems that come up in higher level math
but the moment you start legislating morality
We already do: murder, rape, theft, and other such things are illegal. They likely wouldn't be if most people had no problems with them (if we even had a society in such circumstances).
That is the most asinine thing I have read all day. Murder, rape, and theft all violate the rights mentioned in the Declaration of Independence: Namely the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. You have no right to deprive people of their ability to decide who they have sex with, whether someone else gets to live or die, or whether or not they get to keep their property. Your rights end where mine begin.
It's more of a 'their tourist trap, their rules' sort of thing.
Complaining about the rules of a country(which, even in theoretically democratic and whatnot locations, can get rather unpleasant rather fast and can be a forceful imposition on a fair chunk of the citizenry) is a perfectly valid passtime. And, Nepal is hardly a poster child for high-quality governance services.
Everest, though, is basically a high-altitude theme park. They charge admission(it's called a 'permit'; but it's essentially an 'Admit one to scenic Mount Everest' ticket), and the various concession stands have their own offerings on tap. Gosh, how horrid and shocking. Now they want to deny admission to somebody who didn't pay to have his picture taken at one of the photo kiosks. What a banal little dispute.
Honestly, I don't think you are appreciating the dangers of climbing Mount Everest. It is not an easy or safe climb. If I were in charge of it, I would want to impose a fee on all visitors, too. If someone gets halfway up to the top and needs help, who foots the bill? The Nepal government. It's a serious hike and if charging a fee helps people understand that it is a serious hike, I'm all for it. How often do you hear about people activating emergency beacons in the US because they didn't pack enough water for themselves? Its for this same reason that the Nepal government requires you to hire local sherpas to take you up the mountain, too. You're much less likely to run into these emergency situations with an experienced hiker.
Finally, the law states you cannot broadcast without a permit. End of story. He didn't get one, he can't be on BBC. I highly doubt the law specifies how the broadcast is carried out. Again there are many legitimate reasons for such a fee. For instance, without a fee you may have thousands of reporters flock to Everest and cause extra damage to the mountain. By charging a relatively small fee ($2000 is nothing for most news organizations), you encourage those news agencies to share reporting assets, decreasing the number of people on the mountain side. That decreases the risk of injury or emergency, and probably lowers the overall S&R costs of the Nepalese government all while reducing the environmental impact on the mountain itself.
The biggest battery drain on my phone is always the display, followed by "Cell standby". How is a CPU and chipset able to promise a 50% increase in battery life when it's not even the biggest power user in the phone?
I would guess that you suffered a brief lapse in reading comprehension. My take on this is that the Haswell uses 50% less power for the same performance / capability as an Ivy Bridge. Whether or not that cuts battery consumption overall by 50%... well I highly doubt it.
You can't take your tier one support call into court unless you recorded it.
I was wondering about this. Is it always legal to record such calls if you are yourself informed that the call is being recorded by the other party?
Most states require both parties to be aware that the recording is taking place. Since most of those places inform you that the call is being recorded when you call in, you can record the call legally. I would start the recording from the warning on. And I actually have some SIP software that will play a tone every 5 seconds to make sure all parties know it is recording (quite handy if you're going to record calls). In any event, for extra safety, it doesn't hurt to remind the person that they are being recorded when you finally get them on the line.
This is because snail mail is often used (still, amazingly) for important things for which they have to respond.
This doesn't surprise me at all. Why I just used snail mail on Monday to send a letter informing a management company that they were in breach of contract and that they had 7 days (by state law) to rectify the situation or they would be legally responsible for all sorts of damages, blah blah blah. Anyway. I had been calling and complaining (and even showing up in person) to said management company for 20 days and they did nothing. It wasn't until I filled out a form to file in court and sent it certified mail that they did anything. And let me tell you, they did something to rectify the breach that very day. Why? Because I had a little stamped piece of paper from the post office saying that they most certainly hand delivered my notice of breach of contract and the court system absolutely loves signed receipts. You can take your piece of paper (the one you sent, and the one you received) in and show a judge. You can't take your tier one support call into court unless you recorded it. Even then a tier 1 support person is probably not likely to get the company into as much hot water as a letter.
AT&T would be required to let customers out of their contracts without an early termination fee if it raised prices, but it is avoiding this by simply calling the increase a 'surcharge'
I love the way there's always a loophole!
The only reason this loophole works is because most people are too lazy to go through the effort required to rectify this $0.61 a month issue. Honestly, I don't blame them. If I were sufficiently interested in a problem like this (I'm not, I don't even have a cell phone contract), I would take AT&T Mobility to Small Claims court for breach of contract. I'd ask for damages and for them to pay me an early termination fee for having to deal with the headache of this issue. If thousands of customers did this, I think AT&T would just remove the fee entirely.
Why should we give $200,000 to drug dealers?
They are the ones setting up the mayor and the ones selling the video. Regardless of the authenticity if the government enticed you into breaking the law and filmed it, it's called entrapment which is inadmissible as evidence. However if some enterprising drug dealers entice you into breaking the law and film it somehow it's okay.
No, you are perhaps thinking of blackmail. Only the government can entrap you. Only the government can violate your 4th amendment rights. If I were to call and tell the police that I broke into your house and found a dozen sex slaves in your mom's basement, the police could obtain a warrant, search the house and arrest you. If I steal a gun you've used to commit a crime and turn it over to police with your fingerprints on it, they can use it in court against you. It is only inadmissible if the government did it, or if someone did it at the behest of the government or an agent of the government. I could also video tape you doing anything at any time, even if I am breaking the law by taping you and it could be admitted as evidence against you.
But to be a useful one-time pad, don't you have to be able to repeat the results to decode the message?
No. With a proper random pad generation algorithm, you could never ever reproduce the exact same pad in two places, or at two separate times. You generate the pad once and use some other method (such as couriers) to deliver the pads to the people that need them. You also need a way to guarantee that the courier did not tamper with, sell, or copy the original pad. If you transmit via internet, you would use some previously arranged cryptographic exchange.
Looks like the Xbox One is a home-entertainment center for which gaming is mostly an afterthought.
That's not necessarily a bad thing (hardcore gamers aren't nearly as important of a demographic as they think), but a lack of focus could be a real problem. We already have general-purpose machines that are versatile enough to do what we want them to. Microsoft needs to make the case why this is better than a laptop or a tablet or a smartphone – especially as it is certain to be loaded down with DRM.
This is exactly how the XBox 360 is now. You can do NetFlix, Amazon Video, ESPN3, etc. Now its going to be better integrated into the main OS, I would imagine.
There are two parts to the whole "3D printed gun debate" that I've heard people spouting....
B) I can print an untraceable metal-less gun
A... is pointless because as you say it was always possible to make a cheap gun from common parts. Especially when it doesn't have to be particularly re-usable or reliable or accurate.
B... is kind of an issue. Some thug needs a burner gun for just one or two shots and he can dispose of it or melt it down. Granted, I guess it could always have been done with PVC piping and a 22, but this was does make it more convenient.
B Is not even remotely possible. You need a metal firing pin, and probably a few other metal pieces unless you want a single action revolver. While some metal detectors do not pick up my leather belt + metal belt buckle (normal one, not country style), most do. Sure you can print a burner gun but may still have difficulty by-passing security with it.
People being rational don't murder. Gun control is about limiting the ease with which someone can engage in irrational acts.
Ok so gun control stops some irrational people that don't already have a gun. Those that don't know someone on the street that would be happy to sell them one for the right price. I've never used recreational drugs in my life, but I guarantee you that I could score just about any one I wanted within 3 phone calls. I'd be willing to bet at least one of those 3 people would know someone who would sell me a gun on the spot, no questions asked, too.