If you ever wondered why Microsoft's products like Windows and Office are so bloated and underwhelming, while Apple's are almost always wonderful experiences, this analysis will solve that mystery.
Finally the mystery has been solved! The suspense was killing me.
1. Kill enemy soldier
2. Turn him into a zombie with a necromancy spell
3. Train said zombie in air-borne assault tactics
4. HALO drop him behind enemy lines
5. ???
6. PROFIT!!!
AFAIK, Shogi is the only game I know that allows you to do this.
More to the point, what would you expect a developer to charge if their payment was dependent on financial success of the product they created? I.e. The software shop gets nothing if the software doesn't make money.
Lawyers get paid regardless of the outcome of the case.
If they win, their pay comes from the settlement. (not as a percentage, but as a fixed amount)
Courts filled with lawyers. Lawyers who would all profit from over-complicating the language being used in courts. The prescution profits from it. The defense profits from it. Even the judges profits from it.
I agree that legalese evolved this way due to lawyers seeking loopholes, but regardless of how it became this way, the current legalese is broken and flawed because it's impossible for the average citizen to understand.
A new car built by my company leaves somewhere traveling at 60 mph. The rear differential locks up. The car crashes and burns with everyone trapped inside. Now, should we initiate a recall? Take the number of vehicles in the field, A, multiply by the probable rate of failure, B, multiply by the average out-of-court settlement, C. A times B times C equals X. If X is less than the cost of a recall, we don't do one.
Programmers don't earn $425,000 for eight months of work.
Plus you don't have to hire programmers. You can just pick up a book and learn programming yourself. The same can't be said about legalese. Programming languages are designed to be readable (except perl;), while legalese is designed to be as unreadable as possible.
In this respect, a password is no different than the location of a concealed diary, which you can be compelled to disclose.
There is a huge difference between the key of a safe and and a cryptographic key. The wrong safe key will not open the safe, but the wrong password will still decrypt perfectly fine for any given block cipher.
The safe key obviously does not determine the contents of the safe, but the cryptographic key actually does determine the content of the decrypted plaintext.
For example, suppose I use 256-bit AES for encryption. Depending on which of the 2^256 keys I provide to the court, the decrypted result might be a Shakespeare poem or an illegal document. By providing the "illegal" key I'm incriminating myself.
Slashdot Mirror
If you ever wondered why Microsoft's products like Windows and Office are so bloated and underwhelming, while Apple's are almost always wonderful experiences, this analysis will solve that mystery.
Finally the mystery has been solved! The suspense was killing me.
A single CD being shared by two people? Sounds like copyright infrignment to me.
I have a feeling the RIAA lawyers will hunt down both perpetrators before the cops can finish their donuts.
and copyleft it this time
and the fierce ideology of the open-source community at large
Linux troll! M$ minion! He needs to be hanged, drawn and quartered.
The problem is that there aren't any other rare earth mines around
United states had a monopoly in rare earth metals back in the 80's. I'm pretty sure those mines can be re-activated on a short notice.
Or in the U.S.
Precisely. U.S. was the the global leader in rare earth metals production in the late 1980s.
Don't you know security at an airport is only for show?
That and millimeter wave voyeurism.
No, it means it's time to run Disk Defragmenter.
Hahahaha disregard that, I suck cocks.
It's a bad idea to use the same password everywhere, so I just set the password as my username and pick a new username on every website.
Sorry, my bad. Should've been more specific. 72 virgins in your desired gender.
Being a virgin myself, I'd rather receive 62 virgins and 10 total sluts who could teach me the proper techniques.
1. Kill enemy soldier
2. Turn him into a zombie with a necromancy spell
3. Train said zombie in air-borne assault tactics
4. HALO drop him behind enemy lines
5. ???
6. PROFIT!!!
AFAIK, Shogi is the only game I know that allows you to do this.
A major one.
More to the point, what would you expect a developer to charge if their payment was dependent on financial success of the product they created? I.e. The software shop gets nothing if the software doesn't make money.
Lawyers get paid regardless of the outcome of the case.
If they win, their pay comes from the settlement. (not as a percentage, but as a fixed amount)
If they lose, their pay comes from client.
Actually it's designed by the courts
Courts filled with lawyers. Lawyers who would all profit from over-complicating the language being used in courts.
The prescution profits from it.
The defense profits from it.
Even the judges profits from it.
I agree that legalese evolved this way due to lawyers seeking loopholes, but regardless of how it became this way, the current legalese is broken and flawed because it's impossible for the average citizen to understand.
The profit doesn't come in the form of money. It's something much much better.
FOSS programmers will all receive 72 virgins after they ascent to heaven.
I mean Lisp is fun for penalizing CS freshmen and all, but seriously?
MIT was forced to cancel 6.001 after SCOTUS ruled that learned Lisp was cruel and unusual punishment.
A new car built by my company leaves somewhere traveling at 60 mph. The rear differential locks up. The car crashes and burns with everyone trapped inside. Now, should we initiate a recall? Take the number of vehicles in the field, A, multiply by the probable rate of failure, B, multiply by the average out-of-court settlement, C. A times B times C equals X. If X is less than the cost of a recall, we don't do one.
Programmers don't earn $425,000 for eight months of work.
;), while legalese is designed to be as unreadable as possible.
Plus you don't have to hire programmers. You can just pick up a book and learn programming yourself. The same can't be said about legalese. Programming languages are designed to be readable (except perl
For some reason I read your comment in Chris Hansen's voice...
GEORGE! After all these years your tongue finally slipped!
Woosh!
What makes you think it would be any different in the USA?
GP was talking about the situation in USA, so was my reply.
Thanks, that was the case I was referring to. My wiki-fu was too weak to find it.
In this respect, a password is no different than the location of a concealed diary, which you can be compelled to disclose.
There is a huge difference between the key of a safe and and a cryptographic key. The wrong safe key will not open the safe, but the wrong password will still decrypt perfectly fine for any given block cipher.
The safe key obviously does not determine the contents of the safe, but the cryptographic key actually does determine the content of the decrypted plaintext.
For example, suppose I use 256-bit AES for encryption. Depending on which of the 2^256 keys I provide to the court, the decrypted result might be a Shakespeare poem or an illegal document. By providing the "illegal" key I'm incriminating myself.