This would have been far more impressive if it were a rom hack and not a flash game. Consider for instance Somari. That "video game mashup" has been around since the mid 90s, and is much more impressive IMO.
Of course I know what Moore's law is. I don't have any information on chip fabrication, so that's why I asked for evidence. If you have access to that information, a nice chart of transistor density vs time on a logarithmic scale would be really helpful. I couldn't find anything more recent than 2008.
Fastmail does everything I could want it to do. All you really need out of an email provider is standards compliance. Any bells and whistles you need are provided by the client.
Moore's law is tapering off? I've heard about the impending end of Moore's law for at least the past 10 years, but they keep on going. What evidence is there that Moore's law is tapering off? Wikipedia cites Intel in 2008 as predicting Moore's law to continue until 2029. Not an unbiased source, but I think we'd see the end coming if it was to come in the next 10 years.
No, it's the licensing. You have to negotiate licensing with every music publisher you carry. I'd imagine that the people responsible for Lala don't want to do that because it sounds like hell and they've already cashed out.
Does one need to use Apple code to write a hypervisor that supports OS X? If not, Apple wouldn't have any grounds to sue. There's not much difference between a hypervisor and an emulator, and it's clear that emulators are legal. Whether the end user has the right to run the software on a machine, virtual or otherwise, is a problem for the end user not the vendor.
That's more the fault of the clients than the protocol. There's no reason you can't serve hypertext documents over gopher, and no reason a gopher client couldn't display graphics.
Putting in a little work up front pays off in the long run. Using good tools like LaTeX and R will make your life a lot easier when you do something important. Why deal with spaghetti code in Excel when you can do the same thing with a neatly managed R program? Why fiddle with consistently formatting a long Word document when you can just load a document class in LaTeX?
I didn't see any mention of LaTeX (or Beamer), R, or PostgreSQL. No, these aren't your typical office packages. They're better than your typical office packages.
No game designer should need to know C++. That's for programmers. You can design excellent games using existing engines without touching compiled code. Scripting in lua, python, SCUMM, whatever is all you really need.
Eventually we looked at it and we saw that in late June his manager had requested certain accounts to be created that would have access to certain routers and switches. And he did create those accounts, and he sent that back in an email with the user IDs and passwords, to which Richard Robinson was also copied. If his big concern was that Richard Robinson was not authorized to be a user, why -- just a week before -- did he copy him on an email that has user IDs and passwords?
Because Richard Robinson was authorized to access certain routers and switches, he must then be authorized to access every router? Clearly wrong.
If he would have simply said, "I will create you an account and you can go in and you can remove my access if you want." If he had created access for someone else, I think that would have resolved it.
Was he asked to do this? Did he refuse? Given the nature of the confrontation, would anyone even have let him log in to create such an account?
If he had not decided to leave and go to Nevada a few days later and withdraw US$10,000 in cash, [Childs did this the day before his arrest, while under police surveillance] I think the police may have let it continue on as an employment issue and not a criminal matter.
So now someone who takes a vacation after losing his job is in danger of a felony conviction? That's bullshit.
Maybe there are good answers to these questions. But they're not in the article. What is in the article is not enough to convince me that this juror is competent.
If it was so hard for the jury to decide who an authorized user is, wouldn't Terry Childs have the same problem deciding who an authorized user is? That right there is more than enough to establish reasonable doubt.
Just because it's not legally considered punishment doesn't mean that it's not wrong and that it's not harmful. The internment of Japanese-Americans in WWII was not punishment. That didn't make it any less reprehensible, and it doesn't make this any less reprehensible.
As I said many times previously, there is no legal requirement in Arizona or elsewhere for US citizens to carry any identification with them so long as they aren't engaged in some activity that requires licensing (like driving). Period. End of story.
If you're a US citizen who looks like an immigrant, you're going to have to carry your papers with you. Otherwise you risk being detained. There's no "legal requirement" in the sense that you can't be charged of any crime for not carrying it. But detention itself is a punishment. The fact that you're not getting charged with a crime doesn't get you those hours (or weeks!) of your life back.
-It's called a Valid Driver's License OR Valid State Identification OR Valid Passport OR Valid Military ID.
In no other state of the union do I have to carry any of these.
-No. They would be charged with 'Failure To Identify', which *is* a crime.
Yes, you have to identify yourself verbally. You don't have to carry documentation, big difference.
They would be arrested only if they gave the requesting officer information that didn't match what is on record, and even then, although it IS an arrestable offense, the officer must find reasonable suspicion that the information was volunteered with the intent to mislead him/her, which would be laid out in court as well.
So you're ok with people being arrested and tying up the court system for failing to carry ID?
You CAN'T be stopped without a legally justifiable reason. WITH a legally justifiable reason
What's a legally justifiable reason to suspect someone is an illegal immigrant?
And yes, there is room for discretion, as a kids cannot be expected to have such identification at all times, or a Hispanic couple who is OBVIOUSLY just out for a walk, and not scoping out burglary targets. It's called common sense.
That's something you will find that cops have very little of. What's to stop a police officer from stopping a group of teenaged US citizens of mexican descent and detaining them all because he doesn't like them? There is one rule you must remember to apply to any law. If it can be abused, it will be abused. "common sense" and "discretion" are loopholes which let abuses through.
Secondly, there's nothing in the law which states that a US citizen would be fined for not having a birth certificate on their person.
Nope, you just get detained until they find your paperwork. Which is actually worse than being fined. At least you can contest a fine in court.
Thirdly, if you want to take your dollars to someplace less "xenophobic and less racist", then leave the United States. The Arizona law you're complaining about mirrors existing Federal law which requires legal aliens to carry their immigration paperwork
Does it require US citizens to carry their paperwork with them under threat of detention?
They don't, but if state police in Arizona or Federal immigration officials believe said citizen is an illegal immigrant, it'll save that citizen a lot of time and hassle if they simply have ID with them. So no, you don't have to carry a little plastic ID card with you. You do, however, have to identify yourself if the police request that you do so. And if you're not prepared to cooperate to the point that they can verify your identity, you should be prepared to deal with a lot of time-consuming hassle.
So what you're saying is, you do have to carry papers with you to travel freely in your own country. This "you don't, but... is bullshit. Either you can travel freely in your own country without papers or you can't. As the Supreme Court has recognized on many occasions the right to free travel is fundamental.
If you're driving a vehicle, you have to have one of those anyway. If you simply don't drive at all - ever, and don't want/need a driver's license, you can get a state-issue ID for little or no cost.
Why should a US citizen have to carry paperwork to travel freely in his own country?
Jailing US citizens for not carrying papers they're not required to carry because they are US citizens? Sounds like a bad law to me.
Lets be honest here folks...having a wide open border is the biggest clusterfuck of our century! illegals naturally hate cops (because they are illegal themselves, duh!) so criminals in their neighborhoods can do whatever they want without fear of being turned in
Legalize them and their fear of cops will disappear.
anyone who has been in one lately can tell you the ERs are looking at 12+ hour waiting lines thanks to illegals using them as clinics
Legalize them and get them on the health insurance roles.
just look at the crime rates for places like Phoenix, the towns are becoming warzones!
Legalize drugs and the drug violence will stop coming over the border.
As someone whose state (AR) is starting to get flooded by illegals frankly I'm sick of it. I've known too many folks that have gotten seriously injured by illegals driving without insurance (because they are already breaking the law, what's one more?).
Again, make them legal, give them something to lose and they'll care a lot more.
And with double digit unemployment I'm really fucking sick of jobs like construction, which used to be filled by hard working Americans that actually paid taxes
Legalize them and once again those jobs will be filled by hard working Americans.
Slashdot Mirror
This would have been far more impressive if it were a rom hack and not a flash game. Consider for instance Somari. That "video game mashup" has been around since the mid 90s, and is much more impressive IMO.
What did he do that qualifies as obstruction of justice?
Of course I know what Moore's law is. I don't have any information on chip fabrication, so that's why I asked for evidence. If you have access to that information, a nice chart of transistor density vs time on a logarithmic scale would be really helpful. I couldn't find anything more recent than 2008.
Fastmail does everything I could want it to do. All you really need out of an email provider is standards compliance. Any bells and whistles you need are provided by the client.
Moore's law is tapering off? I've heard about the impending end of Moore's law for at least the past 10 years, but they keep on going. What evidence is there that Moore's law is tapering off? Wikipedia cites Intel in 2008 as predicting Moore's law to continue until 2029. Not an unbiased source, but I think we'd see the end coming if it was to come in the next 10 years.
I have never seen any party be this bad at it.
I have never seen any party be this good at it. It's working out well for them. The constant repetition of bald face lies is shaping public opinion.
No, it's the licensing. You have to negotiate licensing with every music publisher you carry. I'd imagine that the people responsible for Lala don't want to do that because it sounds like hell and they've already cashed out.
The contest required a scheme that would work for arbitrary data. Compressing random data with LZW can result in a file that's larger than the input.
Does one need to use Apple code to write a hypervisor that supports OS X? If not, Apple wouldn't have any grounds to sue. There's not much difference between a hypervisor and an emulator, and it's clear that emulators are legal. Whether the end user has the right to run the software on a machine, virtual or otherwise, is a problem for the end user not the vendor.
There's no markup for hypertext in HTTP either.
That's more the fault of the clients than the protocol. There's no reason you can't serve hypertext documents over gopher, and no reason a gopher client couldn't display graphics.
That's what pgAdmin is for.
Putting in a little work up front pays off in the long run. Using good tools like LaTeX and R will make your life a lot easier when you do something important. Why deal with spaghetti code in Excel when you can do the same thing with a neatly managed R program? Why fiddle with consistently formatting a long Word document when you can just load a document class in LaTeX?
I didn't see any mention of LaTeX (or Beamer), R, or PostgreSQL. No, these aren't your typical office packages. They're better than your typical office packages.
No game designer should need to know C++. That's for programmers. You can design excellent games using existing engines without touching compiled code. Scripting in lua, python, SCUMM, whatever is all you really need.
I still don't buy his reasoning.
Because Richard Robinson was authorized to access certain routers and switches, he must then be authorized to access every router? Clearly wrong.
Was he asked to do this? Did he refuse? Given the nature of the confrontation, would anyone even have let him log in to create such an account?
So now someone who takes a vacation after losing his job is in danger of a felony conviction? That's bullshit.
Maybe there are good answers to these questions. But they're not in the article. What is in the article is not enough to convince me that this juror is competent.
If it was so hard for the jury to decide who an authorized user is, wouldn't Terry Childs have the same problem deciding who an authorized user is? That right there is more than enough to establish reasonable doubt.
Just because it's not legally considered punishment doesn't mean that it's not wrong and that it's not harmful. The internment of Japanese-Americans in WWII was not punishment. That didn't make it any less reprehensible, and it doesn't make this any less reprehensible.
As I said many times previously, there is no legal requirement in Arizona or elsewhere for US citizens to carry any identification with them so long as they aren't engaged in some activity that requires licensing (like driving). Period. End of story.
If you're a US citizen who looks like an immigrant, you're going to have to carry your papers with you. Otherwise you risk being detained. There's no "legal requirement" in the sense that you can't be charged of any crime for not carrying it. But detention itself is a punishment. The fact that you're not getting charged with a crime doesn't get you those hours (or weeks!) of your life back.
You shouldn't need any extra software to print remotely in OS X. Just cat a postscript file over SSH and into lpr on the remote machine.
-It's called a Valid Driver's License OR Valid State Identification OR Valid Passport OR Valid Military ID.
In no other state of the union do I have to carry any of these.
-No. They would be charged with 'Failure To Identify', which *is* a crime.
Yes, you have to identify yourself verbally. You don't have to carry documentation, big difference.
They would be arrested only if they gave the requesting officer information that didn't match what is on record, and even then, although it IS an arrestable offense, the officer must find reasonable suspicion that the information was volunteered with the intent to mislead him/her, which would be laid out in court as well.
So you're ok with people being arrested and tying up the court system for failing to carry ID?
You CAN'T be stopped without a legally justifiable reason. WITH a legally justifiable reason
What's a legally justifiable reason to suspect someone is an illegal immigrant?
And yes, there is room for discretion, as a kids cannot be expected to have such identification at all times, or a Hispanic couple who is OBVIOUSLY just out for a walk, and not scoping out burglary targets. It's called common sense.
That's something you will find that cops have very little of. What's to stop a police officer from stopping a group of teenaged US citizens of mexican descent and detaining them all because he doesn't like them? There is one rule you must remember to apply to any law. If it can be abused, it will be abused. "common sense" and "discretion" are loopholes which let abuses through.
The police would need probable cause before they could assume that you are an unlawful alien.
What exactly would constitute probable cause that someone is here illegally?
Secondly, there's nothing in the law which states that a US citizen would be fined for not having a birth certificate on their person.
Nope, you just get detained until they find your paperwork. Which is actually worse than being fined. At least you can contest a fine in court.
Thirdly, if you want to take your dollars to someplace less "xenophobic and less racist", then leave the United States. The Arizona law you're complaining about mirrors existing Federal law which requires legal aliens to carry their immigration paperwork
Does it require US citizens to carry their paperwork with them under threat of detention?
They don't, but if state police in Arizona or Federal immigration officials believe said citizen is an illegal immigrant, it'll save that citizen a lot of time and hassle if they simply have ID with them. So no, you don't have to carry a little plastic ID card with you. You do, however, have to identify yourself if the police request that you do so. And if you're not prepared to cooperate to the point that they can verify your identity, you should be prepared to deal with a lot of time-consuming hassle.
So what you're saying is, you do have to carry papers with you to travel freely in your own country. This "you don't, but... is bullshit. Either you can travel freely in your own country without papers or you can't. As the Supreme Court has recognized on many occasions the right to free travel is fundamental.
If you're driving a vehicle, you have to have one of those anyway. If you simply don't drive at all - ever, and don't want/need a driver's license, you can get a state-issue ID for little or no cost.
Why should a US citizen have to carry paperwork to travel freely in his own country?
How exactly is this a bad law?
Jailing US citizens for not carrying papers they're not required to carry because they are US citizens? Sounds like a bad law to me.
Lets be honest here folks...having a wide open border is the biggest clusterfuck of our century! illegals naturally hate cops (because they are illegal themselves, duh!) so criminals in their neighborhoods can do whatever they want without fear of being turned in
Legalize them and their fear of cops will disappear.
anyone who has been in one lately can tell you the ERs are looking at 12+ hour waiting lines thanks to illegals using them as clinics
Legalize them and get them on the health insurance roles.
just look at the crime rates for places like Phoenix, the towns are becoming warzones!
Legalize drugs and the drug violence will stop coming over the border.
As someone whose state (AR) is starting to get flooded by illegals frankly I'm sick of it. I've known too many folks that have gotten seriously injured by illegals driving without insurance (because they are already breaking the law, what's one more?).
Again, make them legal, give them something to lose and they'll care a lot more.
And with double digit unemployment I'm really fucking sick of jobs like construction, which used to be filled by hard working Americans that actually paid taxes
Legalize them and once again those jobs will be filled by hard working Americans.