I see, sad. In montreal we have both (3d costs 3$ more, regardless of glasses -- they give them away --). Now some theater have some gimicky stuff (ULTRA something) that you pay premium for -- the only thing may be worth trying would be the D-box --.
idk about us, but in canada there was a few stories just like you described, it was brought to court and all tickets were canceled (http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2009/10/canada-motorists-protest-illegal-work-zone-photo-radar/)
I was merely pointing to the fact that it crossed their -- twisted -- minds.
I do agree with what you stated. If -- assuming not just the legal validity of those patents -- the farmer had nothing to do with the presence of these crops on his field, he bears no responsibility whatsoever. The least Monsanto can do is as you said, buy the contaminated crops at market value.
I'm no expert... but if something like this were to used in the wild, can't it lead to a very dangerous situation?? (contamination of other plants??)
there will be at least someone who'd buy it (out of curiosity/dumb... wasn't told.... etc)
If Monsanto has issues with this, then they need to genetically modify the seed (or plant that it gives birth to) so that it will only produce one generation.
the data/system partition are untouched, only the recovery partition.
and by that logic, if it is feasible then anything from that phone is inadmissible in court (since "they" could have injected the incriminating data), the minute they got their hands on the phone.
depending on phone it is easy,
samsung usually have an unlocked bootloader... you can flash whatever recovery image you want, if the phone is not encrypted... well you get access to any data you want (using adb, CWM recovery has adb enabled with root access by default).
if it is the nexus S there's an easy way to unlock the bootloader without wiping the device (found on xda). for the see previous paragraph.
is there a bandwidth cap on these networks or is it what can the device (phone) muster ?
I've never seen the logic in capping usage as something that can prevent congestion. if all hell Should breaks loose at a given time in the day it will caps or no caps (especially for a conventional ISP). One can argue that the diffidence with cellphones is that ppl always have them and if there were no caps everybody will use them. but I think that ppl have better things to do during the day to just watch videos on their cellphones all day long.
the guy did offer software to modify the cable modem firmware to get uncapped connections or clone the mac addr of some legitimate modem to access the nework (yes cable modems are authenticated with mac addr) . he didn't do it himself.
and there's the cost of doing business.
when someone "uses" bandwidth they can not go for more what they are allowed to. that is a bandwidth cap. Telcos are either lying or overselling said bandwidth. When you have a network that can serve at most X consumers at the same time, and allow access to 10X you run into problems for certain. Knowing that internet is more & more a central part of the daily life one should expect that 10X will be 100X shortly and add more capacity (which is one big shot $$$, but can be concidered a fixed non recurring cost for all intents & purposes, recouped with volume)
Oh, data on the other hand is not limited/scarce resource.
if subsidized, I see why, although I don't agree. a normal contract on what ever service you want would be enough.
but I don't see how they can/would force you into a contract. let alone with data, if you pay the phone up front or get it somewhere else.
Also, these students are showing serious bias. In Science, you don't refuse to listen to what others have to say. You listen, then you are free to find counter-arguments or to accept what they have said. You don't plug your ears and shout "I'M RIGHT AND YOU ARE WRONG".
it's not just science. or not supposed to anyways...
talking to one self isn't pointless, it is thinking!
And before presenting something to an audience, the artist presents it to himself first (thinking) thus the art for the sake of the art before anything else. Selling art is something else entirely.
The audience might get what you are saying or might not, It may like it or may not. It doesn't make your art a lesser art nor you a lesser artist. BTW what is this fixation on REAL/TRUE x -- x : artist, world... etc ---?
For example I don't get what Picasso was trying to communicate & why he chose that specific way to do it.and I find it a waist of time and an aggression to my sight if I try to! does that make Picasso a false artist, or me an art illiterate? I'd say neither, since the appreciation/understanding of the art is by nature a subjective thing.
The problem with people paying flat tax and art being sponsored 100% by the government is that art would become independent of the people's demands.
The problem with the converse proposition is that art will be what ppl want --to buy--, forcing artist to create to please a clientele. Everybody end up copying everybody just to be rich. Art in al of this? dead and buried
Art isn't just a merchandise you can exchange in a market. PPL who want to create, will create regardless of demand and offe. B/c simply they feel the need to create something. Anything else just follows from that and secondary to the artist.
it's the consumers that pay the TVA. the ISPs are mandated to levy it (you pay them and they transfer it to the gov). That said any corp pays taxes (Fr: taxes & impôts ) under different forms -whether enough or not that's an other debate-. So yeah, what he's saying is bullshit.
Slashdot Mirror
I see, sad. In montreal we have both (3d costs 3$ more, regardless of glasses -- they give them away --). Now some theater have some gimicky stuff (ULTRA something) that you pay premium for -- the only thing may be worth trying would be the D-box --.
idk about us, but in canada there was a few stories just like you described, it was brought to court and all tickets were canceled (http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2009/10/canada-motorists-protest-illegal-work-zone-photo-radar/)
threre's an other product just for that purpose and it gives you $$ when you buy it. It is called do not pay the premium for 3D.
I was merely pointing to the fact that it crossed their -- twisted -- minds.
I do agree with what you stated. If -- assuming not just the legal validity of those patents -- the farmer had nothing to do with the presence of these crops on his field, he bears no responsibility whatsoever. The least Monsanto can do is as you said, buy the contaminated crops at market value.
I'm no expert ... but if something like this were to used in the wild, can't it lead to a very dangerous situation?? (contamination of other plants??)
... wasn't told .... etc)
there will be at least someone who'd buy it (out of curiosity/dumb
If Monsanto has issues with this, then they need to genetically modify the seed (or plant that it gives birth to) so that it will only produce one generation.
ever heard of Terminator seeds?
is your frame of reference inertial?
the data/system partition are untouched, only the recovery partition.
and by that logic, if it is feasible then anything from that phone is inadmissible in court (since "they" could have injected the incriminating data), the minute they got their hands on the phone.
depending on phone it is easy, samsung usually have an unlocked bootloader ... you can flash whatever recovery image you want, if the phone is not encrypted ... well you get access to any data you want (using adb, CWM recovery has adb enabled with root access by default).
if it is the nexus S there's an easy way to unlock the bootloader without wiping the device (found on xda). for the see previous paragraph.
Not to be pedant or anything, but did you mean semantic nuance?
is there a bandwidth cap on these networks or is it what can the device (phone) muster ?
I've never seen the logic in capping usage as something that can prevent congestion. if all hell Should breaks loose at a given time in the day it will caps or no caps (especially for a conventional ISP). One can argue that the diffidence with cellphones is that ppl always have them and if there were no caps everybody will use them. but I think that ppl have better things to do during the day to just watch videos on their cellphones all day long.
lim of what when what tends to inf ?
the guy did offer software to modify the cable modem firmware to get uncapped connections or clone the mac addr of some legitimate modem to access the nework (yes cable modems are authenticated with mac addr) . he didn't do it himself.
sell the expertise then, not the product.
I'm in shock o_0
... badwidth != data usage
I make money with a rented car, may be I should I call the dealer and offer him more money ...
and there's the cost of doing business.
when someone "uses" bandwidth they can not go for more what they are allowed to. that is a bandwidth cap. Telcos are either lying or overselling said bandwidth. When you have a network that can serve at most X consumers at the same time, and allow access to 10X you run into problems for certain. Knowing that internet is more & more a central part of the daily life one should expect that 10X will be 100X shortly and add more capacity (which is one big shot $$$, but can be concidered a fixed non recurring cost for all intents & purposes, recouped with volume)
Oh, data on the other hand is not limited/scarce resource.
if subsidized, I see why, although I don't agree. a normal contract on what ever service you want would be enough. but I don't see how they can/would force you into a contract. let alone with data, if you pay the phone up front or get it somewhere else.
if you think of profit as a consequence of doing something then no. If it is an end in its self, then yes you're right
Also, these students are showing serious bias. In Science, you don't refuse to listen to what others have to say. You listen, then you are free to find counter-arguments or to accept what they have said. You don't plug your ears and shout "I'M RIGHT AND YOU ARE WRONG".
it's not just science. or not supposed to anyways ...
you might want to check this : https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Circulatory_system#History_of_discovery and this guy among others : https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Avicenna
a nut job is a nut job religion is irrelevant.
talking to one self isn't pointless, it is thinking! And before presenting something to an audience, the artist presents it to himself first (thinking) thus the art for the sake of the art before anything else. Selling art is something else entirely. ... etc ---?
The audience might get what you are saying or might not, It may like it or may not. It doesn't make your art a lesser art nor you a lesser artist. BTW what is this fixation on REAL/TRUE x -- x : artist, world
For example I don't get what Picasso was trying to communicate & why he chose that specific way to do it.and I find it a waist of time and an aggression to my sight if I try to! does that make Picasso a false artist, or me an art illiterate? I'd say neither, since the appreciation/understanding of the art is by nature a subjective thing.
The problem with people paying flat tax and art being sponsored 100% by the government is that art would become independent of the people's demands.
The problem with the converse proposition is that art will be what ppl want --to buy--, forcing artist to create to please a clientele. Everybody end up copying everybody just to be rich. Art in al of this? dead and buried
Art isn't just a merchandise you can exchange in a market. PPL who want to create, will create regardless of demand and offe. B/c simply they feel the need to create something. Anything else just follows from that and secondary to the artist.
it's the consumers that pay the TVA. the ISPs are mandated to levy it (you pay them and they transfer it to the gov). That said any corp pays taxes (Fr: taxes & impôts ) under different forms -whether enough or not that's an other debate-. So yeah, what he's saying is bullshit.