Just because you usually get waved through, doesn't mean there aren't rules. They don't have time to check everybody's ID, but you're supposed to have it, and there always a chance you'll get caught in a spot check if you don't.
The guy means obvious "given as a gift". "Given" doesn't necessarily mean that. "Gifted", while nonstandard, is a clear and economical shorthand for the longer expression.
Language Nazis are a pain. Not because they're obnoxious. But because they're stuck on the idea that the only purpose of language is to satisfy your High School English teacher. Communication, preferrably with grace, economy, and clarity, is a much higher priority.
Seriously. They've already shown they'll use whatever loopholes they can find in the Bill of Rights. Like right now, we've got several thousand people incarcerated on the territory of an unfriendly power, because it'd be illegal to incarcerate them anywhere else!
...is your accountant. The advantages of leasing versus buying exist in the world of tax writeoffs and accounting rules. Asking Slashdotters about that stuff is as dangerous as asking them for legal advice.
Is not redundant. I wasn't the first to point out the confusion between "trademark" and "copyright" -- but I was the first to point out who made it. And I'm the only poster so far to point out Christoph's sloppyiness about the court ruling.
You talk about "thousands of cookies" as if they were breeding like rats. What they are is the futile attempt by various ad sites to track you -- blocked by your browser being configured to only honor cookies access from the same site that planted them.
You do have your browser configured this way, don't you? It rather more important to restrict the way sites use cookies than to delete the cookies after they've already been used to spy on you.
If it makes you feel better to discard all your cookies and resubmit your passwords, fine, whatever works for you. But you're not gaining any privacy by it.
CNN reports that a man's website, http://www.bosleymedical.com, criticizing the Bosely Medical Institute does not infringe the institute's copyright on its name.
No, they reported that an appeals court ruling determined that the site didn't infringe Bosely's trademark. The original story reports it correctly, an ignorant CNN.com headline writer changed "trademark" to "copyright", and an equally ignorant Christoph submitted this court ruling as if it were the last word. Jeez, how could anybody follow the news recently and not know about the federal appeals process?
I'm tempted to give Zouk a hard to for the usual Slashdot editors sin of posting a story without really reading it. But with so much sloppy thinking by Christoph and that nameless idiot at CNN.com, I guess that's kind of lame.
OK, that works. But what's the point? You're not preventing the sites from tracking your usage, since you have to let them set the cookies to login. Deleting all your cookies at the end of every browser session doesn't prevent them from keeping track of your visits, it just makes a little extra work for you. The extra work may be tiny, but it's also completely unnecessary.
Somehow I doubt that 58% of users are actively going into their browser settings and deleting cookies themselves.
Pretty much my own reaction.
This is most likely users are reinstalling their operating systems [link to microsoft.com]...
You wish! Linux still has a pretty tiny market share.
... or using some spyware removing software that is removing their cookies.
Ah! Here we come to the heart of the matter. TFA goes on to say,
The report found that as many as 39% of online users may be deleting cookies from their primary computer monthly, undermining the usefulness of cookie-based measurement and leaving many site operators flying blind.
Notice that "deleting cookies" not "deleting all cookies". Most web users couldn't live without cookies, since a lot of web sites (including Slashdot) use them for automatic login. But nowadays, most people run spyware scanners, which usually include cookies from the more obnoxious advertising sites in the signature database.
In that context, the "39% of users" and "once a month" actually sounds very conservative. I wonder where they got their figures?
The irony is that deleting cookies after the fact is not a very good privacy measure -- the people who planted them have already had a good chance to track your usage. It's much more effective to set your browser not to provide cookie information except to the originating site.
In other words, the whole cookie issue is just plain bogus.
They're entertaining up to a point. But after the 20th bogus story it begins to wear a little thin.
The best April Fool gags make it a little difficult to figure out that you're being kidded. Not possible when somebody throws a whole bunch of them at you at once.
Such a cycle might be zero carbon emissions. But there are other pollutants. Plus the ecological effects of converting vast tracts of land to fuel crops. Some of which might have the effect or releasing more carbon into the atmosphere.
What's to prevent the state from putting up a reader on the street corner? On every street corner? On every mile marker sign on the highway?
The same thing that prevents them putting laser license plate scanners on every street corner: cost, privacy laws, and litigation-hungry lawyers.
You're right to be concerned about your privacy, but there's already plenty of tech out there for tracking your car. If you don't want cops to spy on you, you need to make sure there are legal safeguards in place, not worry about a minor technology upgrade.
Which is why the Slashdot headline is misleading. The article is mostly about the mod you mention, not about EngergyCS's improved batteries. The headline makes it sound like they're trying to count plugin time towards mileage, which they certainly are not.
Thanks for the explanation. That suggests that the "up to 180 MPH" figure comes from tests where they did a lot of sudden stops!
Still, it's meaningless to compare such a figure with any published figure for an unmodified Prius. Re-running the EPA tests (which is where the official mileage figures come from) would be more informative.
As usual, the Slashdot headline is misleading -- this time, because it's taken out of context. Here's the precise claim in the article:
And EnergyCS, a small company that has collaborated with CalCars, has modified another Prius with more sophisticated batteries; they claim their Prius gets up to 180 m.p.g. and can travel more than 30 miles on battery power.
In other words, the improved milage comes from better batteries, not from plugging the car in.
Still, it's a claim to be approached cautiously. Perhaps improved batteries can improve hybrid milage -- but by a factor of 3? In any case, the "up to" is a hint that this is one of those meaningless "gee whiz" statistics, as with "The IQ of Slashdot users is as high as 300."
mikael writes "The BBC is reporting that an Internet entrepeneur has given up on the high cost of housing in the city..."
Jeez, learn to read. There's nothing in the article about saving money. Which is probably not a priority for somebody who can afford to spend GBP 250,000 (US$470,000) on an RV. Not to mention the cost of parking the thing, hookup fees, gas...
You're right, this is a "motor home", not a "mobile home". But you're wrong about everything else. I've never heard of mobile homes being loaded on a flatbed -- they generally come with their own wheels. And RV (short for Recreational Vehicle) is a generic term, that includes both the trailer and self-propelled "home".
It's not, of course. Just as putting epoxy in a keyhole is no worse than burning down the whole building. But both are malicious acts you want to try to prevent.
unless recovered by a professional? It takes all of 2 minutes to make a boot disk with atapwd and reset it.
Which is not something most computer users know how to do. Trivial for most Slashdotters, but we have a higher level of skill than the typical computer user. It may seem strange to call a bunch of flaky geeks "professionals", but from most peoples' point of view , that's what we are.
Besides, the reason no virus does this is because it needs an operational machine.
Good lord, take a look at some of the viruses out there. Most of them render the machines they're on unusable, after taking some time to propagate themselves. Next you'll be telling me the HIV virus is harmless!
Slashdot Mirror
Just because you usually get waved through, doesn't mean there aren't rules. They don't have time to check everybody's ID, but you're supposed to have it, and there always a chance you'll get caught in a spot check if you don't.
Language Nazis are a pain. Not because they're obnoxious. But because they're stuck on the idea that the only purpose of language is to satisfy your High School English teacher. Communication, preferrably with grace, economy, and clarity, is a much higher priority.
Seriously. They've already shown they'll use whatever loopholes they can find in the Bill of Rights. Like right now, we've got several thousand people incarcerated on the territory of an unfriendly power, because it'd be illegal to incarcerate them anywhere else!
...is your accountant. The advantages of leasing versus buying exist in the world of tax writeoffs and accounting rules. Asking Slashdotters about that stuff is as dangerous as asking them for legal advice.
Is not redundant. I wasn't the first to point out the confusion between "trademark" and "copyright" -- but I was the first to point out who made it. And I'm the only poster so far to point out Christoph's sloppyiness about the court ruling.
You do have your browser configured this way, don't you? It rather more important to restrict the way sites use cookies than to delete the cookies after they've already been used to spy on you.
If it makes you feel better to discard all your cookies and resubmit your passwords, fine, whatever works for you. But you're not gaining any privacy by it.
I'm tempted to give Zouk a hard to for the usual Slashdot editors sin of posting a story without really reading it. But with so much sloppy thinking by Christoph and that nameless idiot at CNN.com, I guess that's kind of lame.
OK, that works. But what's the point? You're not preventing the sites from tracking your usage, since you have to let them set the cookies to login. Deleting all your cookies at the end of every browser session doesn't prevent them from keeping track of your visits, it just makes a little extra work for you. The extra work may be tiny, but it's also completely unnecessary.
Aha! Another Yogic Flyer!
How many users can a free public WiFi network handle before it's saturated and becomes unusable?
That's a good question. Answering it should help one or two lawyers put their kids through college.
In that context, the "39% of users" and "once a month" actually sounds very conservative. I wonder where they got their figures?
The irony is that deleting cookies after the fact is not a very good privacy measure -- the people who planted them have already had a good chance to track your usage. It's much more effective to set your browser not to provide cookie information except to the originating site.
In other words, the whole cookie issue is just plain bogus.
The best April Fool gags make it a little difficult to figure out that you're being kidded. Not possible when somebody throws a whole bunch of them at you at once.
He's the only believable character on the show!
Such a cycle might be zero carbon emissions. But there are other pollutants. Plus the ecological effects of converting vast tracts of land to fuel crops. Some of which might have the effect or releasing more carbon into the atmosphere.
You're right to be concerned about your privacy, but there's already plenty of tech out there for tracking your car. If you don't want cops to spy on you, you need to make sure there are legal safeguards in place, not worry about a minor technology upgrade.
Well, you kind of failed your IQ test. Go back and parse "as high as" again.
Which is why the Slashdot headline is misleading. The article is mostly about the mod you mention, not about EngergyCS's improved batteries. The headline makes it sound like they're trying to count plugin time towards mileage, which they certainly are not.
Still, it's meaningless to compare such a figure with any published figure for an unmodified Prius. Re-running the EPA tests (which is where the official mileage figures come from) would be more informative.
Still, it's a claim to be approached cautiously. Perhaps improved batteries can improve hybrid milage -- but by a factor of 3? In any case, the "up to" is a hint that this is one of those meaningless "gee whiz" statistics, as with "The IQ of Slashdot users is as high as 300."
You're right, this is a "motor home", not a "mobile home". But you're wrong about everything else. I've never heard of mobile homes being loaded on a flatbed -- they generally come with their own wheels. And RV (short for Recreational Vehicle) is a generic term, that includes both the trailer and self-propelled "home".
It's not, of course. Just as putting epoxy in a keyhole is no worse than burning down the whole building. But both are malicious acts you want to try to prevent.