Why are companies allowed to trademark some exceedingly common words or phrases and then extort others based on that? Sure, such things ensure that there will always be need for lawyers, but what about the rest of the society? It just creates even more work for already-overworked courts, it hurts any entity that can't afford to fight back, it indirectly stifles free speech -- aside from the lawyers, the company, and the hands that the company greases the society at large doesn't seem to benefit from such shenanigans at all, yet no one in position of power is even trying to steer the Titanic away from the ice.
I never understood the idea of slapping a humongous monstrosity on your wrist, but then having to be constantly charging it or having its display off all the time just to save battery. I've multiple times voiced my wish for pretty much exactly what the article is about, so I'm cautiously excited seeing and hearing more about this. An e-Ink display is great for showing things that don't need high refresh-rates, like e.g. reminders, slowly updating weather data, or stock tickers, or messages or, you know, clock -- I would love to have something like this to keep an eye on my servers just by flicking my wrist.
I have the opposite experience: it's years since I last encountered a laptop that had problems with suspend on Windows. Certainly no crashing or random rebooting or such. I can't comment on Linux since none of them were using that.
Though if they are only missing 26.2% of all pedestrians I'd call that a fail. If they are missing 74.8% that is still a fail.
You're interpreting it incorrectly. "Missing" a pedestrian, in this case, means the system didn't detect the pedestrian, so it did detect and avoided 73.8% of them.
But, changes that people really don't like tend to bring about a response. The Cuyahoga river for example was so toxic that it was completely devoid of fish, and the water itself was flammable, whereas now some 44 species inhabit it.
So, wait, you're saying that humans caused the river to become toxic and flammable and then managed to fix it and that somehow precludes that humans can't cause the oceans to become acidic and/or toxic?
If a person is willing to drive a bike under influence why would they then go and deliberately prevent themselves from doing that? It's not really much different from alco-locks in cars: the people who are most against it are most likely the ones most in need of it. All of this just begs the question: who is the lock for, who is it that is going to buy and install those locks on stuff for the people who most likely should have them and then maintain the locks?
I was actually thinking while reading these reviews that someone should instead make a movie where Doom is the protagonist. Doom is an interesting character in so many different ways; he is motivated by the need to be a better man than anyone else, including himself, and to make the world around him better, but he keeps headbutting with the "actual heroes" because they don't understand him, they don't even want to understand him, and he is willing to use more drastic methods to bring about his utopia than these "actual heroes" are willing to let him. Even when he becomes a literal god, saves the universe from a collapse and makes the world a wonderful place for people to live he still can't chug down the feelings of inferiority compared to what he thinks he could still become nor are the "heroes" still willing to look past his exterior and see who he is for real.
There's just so MUCH potential there, it could be a very deep movie and flipping the viewpoint around like that to revolve around the anti-hero instead would definitely interest a lot of people. But nooooo, Hollywood just wants to push out easy, mediocre crap:S
Are you sure you can't install CM12 on your current phone? http://forum.xda-developers.co... at a glance seems to offer everything you need. Your phone's specs are mostly similar to my old Galaxy Note's, ie. 720p display, 1GB RAM and such, and my Note certainly got a lot spiffier with CM12 and seems to consume less battery than it did with stock ROMs.
Because the bugs lie in HTC's software and that software is baked in the firmware. While these things are an industry standard practice these days they aren't an Android - standard thing; stock Android, like e.g. the Nexus - devices use, don't have this bug.
Have you checked if there are any custom ROMs for it on XDA-forums? I got fed up with these vulnerabilities myself yesterday, what with LG taking a minimum of 6 months to even consider doing anything, and wiped my LG G2 and installed Cyanogenmod on it; no bloat, much slicker, and both this and the Stagefright - bugs have been fixed. I have Cyanogenmod 12 on my aging Galaxy Note, too, that I just have hanging around as a replacement phone should something happen to my G2: Samsung never updated the Note beyond Kitkat and Samsung's own firmware was rife with bugs and god damn that Touchwiz slowed things down, but, again, replacing the official ROM made the device feel like new.
I've actually tried to talk about this a few times in the past, but people tend to get offended as soon as I open my mouth, they just can't accept the idea of treating pedophiles -- persecution is the only Truly Acceptable(TM) way. I find that kind of appalling. We are already treating a lot of people with all sorts of generally untowards and socially possibly destructive traits and behaviours, why should pedophilia automatically be any different? Someone getting help for it without being subjected to overbearing hatred, threats of violence and whatnot could prevent cases of abuse and could make these people's lives more enjoyable.
Certainly, someone who does not seem to be able to control themselves even despite help should be placed under intense scrutiny and not be let around children by themselves -- I totally am not saying they should just get a free pass --, but at the same time those who would be willing to seek and accept help should receive humane treatment and respect. But perhaps my view on the matter is just too radical for the world to accept it yet..
How is that any different from those who try to "cure" or "treat" homophiles just because they dislike how they're attracted to another member of their sex?
Sex between consenting adults is quite different from sex between an adult or adults and underage children. And treating someone doesn't mean curing them; when you're treating someone with e.g. those rage-issues I mentioned in my post you're trying to help them control the rage, not trying to make them magically not feel the rage anymore. Treating a pedophile would be the same thing; trying to help them find ways to cope and control the urges so that they don't become totally overwhelming and to help them with any possible associated depression and such.
That said, for the sake of devil's advocate, please prove that someone having photos and recorded footage (read: not animation or drawings) of children engaged in sexual situations is going to cause the person to go out and molest children.
Red herring: meta-monkey never claimed anything such.
Banning this one sounds like a bad idea to me. I know there are people who e.g. have issues with rage and are unable to control it, even with medication and therapy, unless they can find a safe outlet for it every now and then and for some of them violent videogames have been a great alternative. I would imagine imaginary CP could serve as a similar outlet. The people who get tickled too much about such and then go and do things for real will do it anyways, so banning such won't stop those people, but providing an outlet for people whom such content would help control themselves might, indeed, prevent them from taking it out on a real person. Of course, IMHO, there should still be some sort of therapy in addition to such, but our society makes it really difficult for people to admit such a problem even to professionals.
Shutting down all online porn-sites in the UK? Yeah, go ahead, see how long the public is willing to play along; I predict quite an uproar. Besides, it wouldn't stop porn-sites from outside the UK anyways, so it would both upset a lot of people and yet be wholly ineffective.
Blizzard's Battle.net does this. Or at least to, I haven't checked recently. I did contact them about it and they just scoffed it off as a "security measure."
No. HEVC provides similar image-quality at half the bitrates as H.264, so that'd automatically make it much more appealing for e.g. streaming-services -- think of Netflix, YouTube, Twitch, Justin.tv and so on and so forth. On the other hand, HEVC would provide much higher image-quality if you used the same bitrates as for H.264, which would make such content much more appealing to end-users. I, for example, am often annoyed by the banding and compression-artifacting with e.g. Netflix, but if they switched over to HEVC and just used otherwise the same bitrates I'd be getting much clearer picture. Basically, HEVC allows you to save in bandwidth or storage or allows you to improve quality. All of these are very good reasons to upgrade from H.264.
Now, VP9 is similar to HEVC in that that it'd also allow for saving in bandwidth or storage or to improve quality of video, but support for VP9 is pretty much non-existent.
Well, I don't have a 1Gbps connection, I only have 260Mbps, but e.g. Github always seems to saturate my connection more than happily. Similarly, when I download latest ISO of Ubuntu or updates to one with apt-get I get close to cap. Quite frankly, the only servers that I can think of at the moment that have trouble handling faster download - speeds have been those where ASUS and AsRock have their driver - and firmware - updates; everywhere else I am pretty consistently getting full bandwidth's worth. It's especially fun installing a 40GiB game from Steam at full blast -- doesn't take all that long.
Yes, this is all anecdotal and all, so take from that what you will, but I am definitely under the impression that at least all the bigger servers can totally handle such speeds these days.
I never said anywhere that the rest of the world is the same, I was quite specifically asking about the US ISPs mentioned here. Here in Finland I have always gotten the advertised speeds myself, like e.g. right now I'm on a 260Mbps connection and I get that full 260Mbps day in, day out -- there's no variation to that, it doesn't go up when people go to work/school and drop when they come back or anything like that. However, I often come across stories from the US where ISPs can't even maintain 1.5Mbps connections, let alone 1Gbps, and I was just kind of looking for if someone here had some first-hand experience to share on these things.
Slashdot Mirror
Why are companies allowed to trademark some exceedingly common words or phrases and then extort others based on that? Sure, such things ensure that there will always be need for lawyers, but what about the rest of the society? It just creates even more work for already-overworked courts, it hurts any entity that can't afford to fight back, it indirectly stifles free speech -- aside from the lawyers, the company, and the hands that the company greases the society at large doesn't seem to benefit from such shenanigans at all, yet no one in position of power is even trying to steer the Titanic away from the ice.
I never understood the idea of slapping a humongous monstrosity on your wrist, but then having to be constantly charging it or having its display off all the time just to save battery. I've multiple times voiced my wish for pretty much exactly what the article is about, so I'm cautiously excited seeing and hearing more about this. An e-Ink display is great for showing things that don't need high refresh-rates, like e.g. reminders, slowly updating weather data, or stock tickers, or messages or, you know, clock -- I would love to have something like this to keep an eye on my servers just by flicking my wrist.
I have the opposite experience: it's years since I last encountered a laptop that had problems with suspend on Windows. Certainly no crashing or random rebooting or such. I can't comment on Linux since none of them were using that.
Though if they are only missing 26.2% of all pedestrians I'd call that a fail. If they are missing 74.8% that is still a fail.
You're interpreting it incorrectly. "Missing" a pedestrian, in this case, means the system didn't detect the pedestrian, so it did detect and avoided 73.8% of them.
What I'm saying is that when we create problems, we tend to be pretty well self correcting.
https://www.google.com/search?...
https://www.google.com/search?...
Hmmmmm.
But, changes that people really don't like tend to bring about a response. The Cuyahoga river for example was so toxic that it was completely devoid of fish, and the water itself was flammable, whereas now some 44 species inhabit it.
So, wait, you're saying that humans caused the river to become toxic and flammable and then managed to fix it and that somehow precludes that humans can't cause the oceans to become acidic and/or toxic?
Unless Apple somehow fixes this the only truly working method would be to desolder all Thunderbolt-connectors or fill them with glue or something.
If a person is willing to drive a bike under influence why would they then go and deliberately prevent themselves from doing that? It's not really much different from alco-locks in cars: the people who are most against it are most likely the ones most in need of it. All of this just begs the question: who is the lock for, who is it that is going to buy and install those locks on stuff for the people who most likely should have them and then maintain the locks?
I was actually thinking while reading these reviews that someone should instead make a movie where Doom is the protagonist. Doom is an interesting character in so many different ways; he is motivated by the need to be a better man than anyone else, including himself, and to make the world around him better, but he keeps headbutting with the "actual heroes" because they don't understand him, they don't even want to understand him, and he is willing to use more drastic methods to bring about his utopia than these "actual heroes" are willing to let him. Even when he becomes a literal god, saves the universe from a collapse and makes the world a wonderful place for people to live he still can't chug down the feelings of inferiority compared to what he thinks he could still become nor are the "heroes" still willing to look past his exterior and see who he is for real.
There's just so MUCH potential there, it could be a very deep movie and flipping the viewpoint around like that to revolve around the anti-hero instead would definitely interest a lot of people. But nooooo, Hollywood just wants to push out easy, mediocre crap :S
Are you sure you can't install CM12 on your current phone? http://forum.xda-developers.co... at a glance seems to offer everything you need. Your phone's specs are mostly similar to my old Galaxy Note's, ie. 720p display, 1GB RAM and such, and my Note certainly got a lot spiffier with CM12 and seems to consume less battery than it did with stock ROMs.
Why is it HTC's responsibility to patch it?
Because the bugs lie in HTC's software and that software is baked in the firmware. While these things are an industry standard practice these days they aren't an Android - standard thing; stock Android, like e.g. the Nexus - devices use, don't have this bug.
Have you checked if there are any custom ROMs for it on XDA-forums? I got fed up with these vulnerabilities myself yesterday, what with LG taking a minimum of 6 months to even consider doing anything, and wiped my LG G2 and installed Cyanogenmod on it; no bloat, much slicker, and both this and the Stagefright - bugs have been fixed. I have Cyanogenmod 12 on my aging Galaxy Note, too, that I just have hanging around as a replacement phone should something happen to my G2: Samsung never updated the Note beyond Kitkat and Samsung's own firmware was rife with bugs and god damn that Touchwiz slowed things down, but, again, replacing the official ROM made the device feel like new.
I've actually tried to talk about this a few times in the past, but people tend to get offended as soon as I open my mouth, they just can't accept the idea of treating pedophiles -- persecution is the only Truly Acceptable(TM) way. I find that kind of appalling. We are already treating a lot of people with all sorts of generally untowards and socially possibly destructive traits and behaviours, why should pedophilia automatically be any different? Someone getting help for it without being subjected to overbearing hatred, threats of violence and whatnot could prevent cases of abuse and could make these people's lives more enjoyable.
Certainly, someone who does not seem to be able to control themselves even despite help should be placed under intense scrutiny and not be let around children by themselves -- I totally am not saying they should just get a free pass --, but at the same time those who would be willing to seek and accept help should receive humane treatment and respect. But perhaps my view on the matter is just too radical for the world to accept it yet..
How is that any different from those who try to "cure" or "treat" homophiles just because they dislike how they're attracted to another member of their sex?
Sex between consenting adults is quite different from sex between an adult or adults and underage children. And treating someone doesn't mean curing them; when you're treating someone with e.g. those rage-issues I mentioned in my post you're trying to help them control the rage, not trying to make them magically not feel the rage anymore. Treating a pedophile would be the same thing; trying to help them find ways to cope and control the urges so that they don't become totally overwhelming and to help them with any possible associated depression and such.
That said, for the sake of devil's advocate, please prove that someone having photos and recorded footage (read: not animation or drawings) of children engaged in sexual situations is going to cause the person to go out and molest children.
Red herring: meta-monkey never claimed anything such.
Banning this one sounds like a bad idea to me. I know there are people who e.g. have issues with rage and are unable to control it, even with medication and therapy, unless they can find a safe outlet for it every now and then and for some of them violent videogames have been a great alternative. I would imagine imaginary CP could serve as a similar outlet. The people who get tickled too much about such and then go and do things for real will do it anyways, so banning such won't stop those people, but providing an outlet for people whom such content would help control themselves might, indeed, prevent them from taking it out on a real person. Of course, IMHO, there should still be some sort of therapy in addition to such, but our society makes it really difficult for people to admit such a problem even to professionals.
That is the difference between the average and the great IMHO.
Or the lucky.
Right...because such sites couldn't possibly be blocked regardless of where they're based...
Right, that worked so well for e.g. The Pirate Bay...
Shutting down all online porn-sites in the UK? Yeah, go ahead, see how long the public is willing to play along; I predict quite an uproar. Besides, it wouldn't stop porn-sites from outside the UK anyways, so it would both upset a lot of people and yet be wholly ineffective.
That would completely undermine the whole idea of it being remotely-controllable. OP's suggestion is much better.
You can write a browser with a built-in password manager.
Why should a password manager be a part of a browser? You do realize that there are plenty of cases even outside of the web where passwords are used.
Blizzard's Battle.net does this. Or at least to, I haven't checked recently. I did contact them about it and they just scoffed it off as a "security measure."
create a competing standard that is designed specifically to avoid patents, and license it royalty-free.
I'll just leave this here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
No. HEVC provides similar image-quality at half the bitrates as H.264, so that'd automatically make it much more appealing for e.g. streaming-services -- think of Netflix, YouTube, Twitch, Justin.tv and so on and so forth. On the other hand, HEVC would provide much higher image-quality if you used the same bitrates as for H.264, which would make such content much more appealing to end-users. I, for example, am often annoyed by the banding and compression-artifacting with e.g. Netflix, but if they switched over to HEVC and just used otherwise the same bitrates I'd be getting much clearer picture. Basically, HEVC allows you to save in bandwidth or storage or allows you to improve quality. All of these are very good reasons to upgrade from H.264.
Now, VP9 is similar to HEVC in that that it'd also allow for saving in bandwidth or storage or to improve quality of video, but support for VP9 is pretty much non-existent.
Well, I don't have a 1Gbps connection, I only have 260Mbps, but e.g. Github always seems to saturate my connection more than happily. Similarly, when I download latest ISO of Ubuntu or updates to one with apt-get I get close to cap. Quite frankly, the only servers that I can think of at the moment that have trouble handling faster download - speeds have been those where ASUS and AsRock have their driver - and firmware - updates; everywhere else I am pretty consistently getting full bandwidth's worth. It's especially fun installing a 40GiB game from Steam at full blast -- doesn't take all that long.
Yes, this is all anecdotal and all, so take from that what you will, but I am definitely under the impression that at least all the bigger servers can totally handle such speeds these days.
I never said anywhere that the rest of the world is the same, I was quite specifically asking about the US ISPs mentioned here. Here in Finland I have always gotten the advertised speeds myself, like e.g. right now I'm on a 260Mbps connection and I get that full 260Mbps day in, day out -- there's no variation to that, it doesn't go up when people go to work/school and drop when they come back or anything like that. However, I often come across stories from the US where ISPs can't even maintain 1.5Mbps connections, let alone 1Gbps, and I was just kind of looking for if someone here had some first-hand experience to share on these things.