I know that Americans are wedded to their inefficient cars and all, but, really, is 300 miles considered a long distance off a single fill? Really? That's pathetic!
My 1996 Nissan Primera, which has four-wheel-drive just to increase its consumption, can get around 440km of urban driving off a single tank. On a long trip (such as Auckland to Wellington) I regularly achieve in excess of 600km from a tank. That's nearer 400 miles than 300. In an older car, with the extra drive-train losses from powering all four wheels. I'm not a particularly conservative driver, either, in terms of my acceleration habits - I don't exceed the posted limits, but I like to get there as quickly as possible.
From the article:
"Then there's the secretive Tarahumara tribe, the best long-distance runners in the world. These are a people who live in basic conditions in Mexico, often in caves without running water, and run with only strips of old tyre or leather thongs strapped to the bottom of their feet. They are virtually barefoot."Virtually barefoot. Which is to say not barefoot at all. These 'best runners in the world' have decided that they need footwear.
Yeah. "Old tyre or leather thongs". That's called "Stopping my feet getting all cut to shit as I run across the rocky ground" not "I've got crap technique and use these shoes to try and compensate". Not even vaguely comparable. One has a function related in no way to the running, but in every way to the protection of the feet from the ground. The other is all about the running, and not just protecting the feet from the ground but also about protecting the joints from the impact of the feet impacting the ground. Do you actually not see the total lack of correlation?
Now, maybe you're in the U.K. or somewhere in Europe, but my understanding is, at least in the U.S., is that truth is an absolute defense.
Can't speak for Europe, but it's definitely the same in the UK (and countries that derive from its legal traditions, such as New Zealand). Can't recall the name of the case, but it was affirmed by a rock artist's manager who outed the artist's public sanctimony on drugs, sex, etc, as totally hypocritical given their narcotics-fuelled benders and various "immoral" carryings-on. Funnily enough the artist sued, and the manager was vindicated by proving that it was all true.
$15k worth of hardware? Are you gold-plating the case, so they'll think it must be good? I'd be pushing it to spend NZD15k on a top-notch OpenBSD box, and we're currently at USD0.54/NZD!
Unless you're putting in 10GbE NICs, I guess, though that's getting a wee bit too bleeding edge for my liking in terms of support in OpenBSD.
I think you mean LA, not CA. The only state in the union that uses civil law rather than common law is Louisiana, and that's courtesy of their French heritage.
California may have codified some areas of legislation, but it's definitely not a civil law state. Most common law jurisdictions (I live in New Zealand, which is one of them) have some codified legislation, but that doesn't mean they have civil law systems.
Katrina's emergency response from the feds was very similar to previous storms. What changed was the magnitude of the disaster AND the gross ineptitude of local authorities and _citizens_.
Ably assisted by Dubbyah making FEMA a sub-agency of DHS, which appears to be the most incompetent agency in existence - a title that takes some doing, I know.
As soon as you make emergency managers part of a body that's all about finding "t3h terrists", you change its focus and direction. Whether or not FEMA was a charlie foxtrot before 11/9 is a point for argument, I'm sure, but since being subsumed into DHS it's been an unstoppable toboggan ride into the abyss of bureaucratic hell.
If you want to see how emergency management should be run, look to the Coasties. They saved 33.5k people after Katrina, and they have fewer than 40k staff! They don't insist on kicking decisions about the colour of Post-It notes up to national command level, which means they're agile and can respond quickly. Local commanders have authority to make decisions, and that's that. The closure of NY Harbour after the planes crashed was ordered by the port captain, without having to check with his boss, or his boss' boss. Same with Baltimore/Washington. That is how an emergency organisation needs to think and function. Instead, DHS and all its subsidiary parts (with the exception of USCG, it seems) are all about buck-passing and central control.
Or did some smart dudes sit around and dream up a more efficient way to use the same spectrum using basically the same hardware as before?
Yeah, pretty much. As someone else said, b uses a different modulation to g. The change from DSSS to OFDM was mostly about more-efficient use of spectrum, without utilising more of the spectrum.
There was something, a couple of months ago, that discussed the copyrightability, to make up a word, of game rules. But a quick search couldn't find it.
Since copyright cases frequently get cited cross-jurisdictionally in regards to what can and can't be copyrighted, there is case law from Commonwealth (UK and NZ) courts that says that both rules and layouts for games can be copyrighted.
I don't have the lecture material handy, since I took the course last semester, but in an IP law paper the lecturer discussed cases on both. In one, it was held that the design of a coupon for playing football pools could be copyrighted (Sun Newspapers rings a bell, but I've encountered them so many times in the course of studying commercial law over the last three years that I wouldn't take it as gospel.) In another, a fantasy rugby game was ripped off. The court held that the combination of player selections, number of players, etc, was so utterly unique (and distinct from any form of rugby actually played) that it was inconceivable that the defendant came up with the exact same combination themselves, thus the defendant had copied directly and in an infringing manner. I can't recall the name of that case at all, and the law library databases aren't much help. I'll check the details when I get home tonight.
The key thing with copyright is that a concept cannot be copyrighted. It is the representation of the idea, not the idea itself, that is protected. The layout of the Scrabble board is clearly copyrightable - premium square values and placements, 15x15 board, and so on. Likewise the rules, such as the 50-point bonus for a bingo (laying all seven tiles in one play) and the double-scoring opening word. Scrabulous hasn't got a leg to stand on for breaching copyright, because they've so clearly copied wholesale from Scrabble.
The concert was in the US, YouTube is based in the US, thus US law is the only law that matters. Even if Prince didn't have a licence to perform the song, he is still entitled to copyright in the performance. Radiohead could sue him for infringement of their various copyrights, and the publisher of the video is liable for secondary infringement, but that's not the issue.
As for arguing against myself, I was arguing against my post's parent suggesting that UK law doesn't recognise performance right. It does.
While you're working on your comprehension, grow some nads of your own and get an account.
Radiohead is an English group, and I'm not sure if what you're saying is true under English law
Two problems with this.
1) YouTube is American, based in America, subject to US copyright law. It doesn't matter a damn where Radiohead is from, because the jurisdiction that counts is the one where the law is being applied. The DMCA is a 'merkin invention, being used on a 'merkin site. Ergo, Radiohead's country-of-origin is irrelevant.
2) Performance right is recognised in UK copyright law. So Prince is entitled to copyright in his performance of the song, even though he does not hold the copyright in the lyrics or the musical score.
If Prince failed to get the appropriate licence to perform the song, as others have noted Radiohead have a course of action for breach of copyright in the lyrics and/or score. They have no grounds to get the video restored, because they don't hold the copyright in the performance and that's the right that the video infringes.
I wish they'd dump Atheros and go for a WiFi chipset with a proper open-source driver.
You mean like a BSD driver? Like the ones in [Open,Free]BSD? The ones that work like a charm? Yeah, that lack of a "proper open-source driver" sure is a bitch.
What is it about Linux that says that hardware that's better-supported in the BSDs than in Linux is considered to not have open-source drivers?
how does knowing what date the H-bomb was dropped on Hiroshima measure any kind of intelligence?
If you answered anything other than "never", it measures your lack of knowledge of the history of nuclear weapons. Hydrogen bombs weren't developed until the 50's, Hiroshima and Nagasaki were straight fission weapons.
Tell you what. I'll give you the option of "takedown training" against someone who is violent, likely to have a knife and is willing to kill you, or a taser. Then I'll fire your ass for getting yourself close enough to get killed.
There's your problem. Your society (I'm assuming you're American) is so in the throes of litigation and risk-elimination that cops are left with no option but to use the greatest level of justifiable force as soon as possible. Trying to use escalating force likely results in disciplinary action. In sane countries, police officers are recognised as being engaged in a physically dangerous job and thus expected to take calculated risks.
Here in New Zealand, we had a case just last year where an offender armed with a hammer got fatally shot after getting within two metres (or one metre depending on which media report you follow) of an armed cop who was ordering him to put down the weapon. He was closer than our police SOPs state is an acceptable distance for engaging an armed suspect, but there is unlikely to be any fallout in that regard for the officer involved. He was there, he made the call, that's his job. Until such time as the US gets over its obsession with suing anyone and everyone for everything that could possibly have been their fault, your cops will continue to resort to excessive force because it's the only way they can ensure they won't be censured for not using enough force. Fucking idiotic!
umm, sorry, you what?! Europe's population in 1950 was larger than the population of the US today. In 2005 it was estimated at 728m, which if I'm not mistaken is roughly 230% of the population of the US.
Posting a story like that would be a sure-fire way to make Big Blue's stock drop like a hot rock, and you'd have shareholders on your arse faster than GNAA members at an orgy.
If the SEC thought it had been done with the intent of manipulating the market for gain, though, you'd be wishing that it was just shareholders and the GNAA after your arse. Coz there'd be a strong likelihood that your arse would become property of Bubba.
The downside to that approach is that emergency vehicles encounter cars stopped at a red light at every intersection. Where I live, drivers panic when an emergency vehicle approaches, move their car six inches towards the side of the road, and don't realize they should go through a red light to clear the roadway.
I've heard emergency drivers say: "If you don't know what to do and where to go when you see/hear an emergency vehicle, simply stop. It's much easier to manage your way around a halted vehicle than around one whose driver is panicking."
I definitely agree with the "stop" rule. Unless the only way they can get around you without having to cross a traffic island is for you to move your car, just stay the hell still!
I'm not a trained emergency response driver, but when I was in the Fire Service here I rode as front-seat passenger more than a few times in vehicles responding as urgent traffic. Emergency drivers know the dimensions of their vehicle, and they know its maneuvering limitations. They can deal better with your car being a stationary obstacle than a moving one, especially since they cannot read the minds of other drivers.
The other thing to consider is that most jurisdictions will not give a waiver of liability to a driver who goes through a red light to allow an emergency vehicle through. If you're in a crash, you ran a red light. You might be able to escape prosecution for a minor crash, but your insurance company is still going to hold you liable.
A few people have mentioned that OOXML has been "implemented" by a few applications. Completely? Compliant with all umpteen-thousand pages of the spec? No, didn't think so.
The thing to consider is that SA requires
the intellectual rights required to implement the standard (eg essential patent claims) are irrevocably available, without royalties attached
That could be a problem when trying to get the various old-versions-of-Word things to work, since the "intellectual rights" to "FuckShitUpLikeWord97" and "BreakCrapLikeWord95" are a) inextricably tied into the spec and b) absolutely not going to be forthcoming from MS for anyone who wants to actually produce a complete, fully-compliant implementation. Anyone think they even have those things defined in writing? I don't!
I'd say this one is game, set, and match to ODF. OOXML just cannot fulfill the access requirements if anyone tries to actually implement it in its entirety, and since it sounds like SA is on a total OSS kick one can probably safely assume that they will be demanding multiple implementations that comply down to every last comma, semi-colon and full-stop.
The poster obviously read TFA, and noticed that the objection these people have is that they don't have clearances, don't want clearances, but are being expected to grant access to the same level of information about their lives as if they DID have clearances.
I think you missed the point. These people do not have security clearances. That's most of the reason for their ire, since invasive background investigations are meant to be about ensuring people who work on matters of national security aren't open to improper influence.
If you don't work on matters of national security, where is the concern with improper influence or motives? If someone's job puts them in a position where they might pose a threat to the safety of the country, they ought to be vetted and cleared appropriately. If not, filling out a questionnaire ought to be sufficient - though some of those questions are pretty fucking nosey, IMO, given that this is simply for getting an access card to allow you into places you've been going in the past anyway.
Maybe, maybe not. I bought a Compaq laptop a few years ago (that it was Compaq branded should give you some idea of just how long ago this must have been), and paid the extra $100 or whatever it was for an extra two years of warranty cover. About five weeks before the extension expired half of the keyboard packed it in. Cost to fix? $0. Had it happened a couple of months later I would've probably ended up buying a new laptop rather than paying for the repairs.
Depending on what you're buying, extended warranty can be a very good thing. One of my housemates owns the washing machine, and bought the extended warranty for an extra five years. Another case of "in the nick of time" cover, because the drum over-balance sensor corroded and started to fail a couple of months before the end of the warranty period. Out-of-warranty repair of the sensor is about $150, but it cost us bupkis.
2. Don't use BMI. It's a crappy measure. Anyone who lifts weights regularly can easily be considered obese by BMI (even if they're not a "body builder"). I've been over that line my whole life and I'm not fat.
Really?
Yes, really. The All Blacks are arguably the world's top rugby team, with the players quite clearly amongst the best athletes on the planet. But quite a few of them are deemed obese based on BMI. These are guys who play 80+ minutes of top-level sport in a single match (and rugby players actually spend most of the game playing, not standing around watching), unquestionably fit and healthy, but also very, very muscular. BMI cannot, and does not pretend to, account for people with significant muscle mass.
Could you even use IR for this kind of intercept? Surely the IR tracking would be confused by the huge, and very hot, plume of air behind the aircraft? The suggestion in another post that you don't need to be faster than the "plane" to intercept doesn't work very well when the missile is guided on IR, since it will be chasing the aircraft. If it's not significantly (at least one more multiple of the speed of sound) faster than that which it's pursuing, it cannot possibly catch it before running out of fuel.
I'd wonder if openbsd has recieved this security rating?
Of course it hasn't. Certification costs a lot of money (tens- if not hundreds-of-thousands of dollars), and there're no organisations with that kind of money that have a major interest in OpenBSD. Could it pass? No, because it lacks RBAC/MAC and other necessary security systems. Has it even been tested? Certainly not, because nobody's put it up for certification, and also because the team that produces it haven't built in subsystems for RBAC/MAC. That's not their aim, and likely never will be.
On a side note, FreeBSD does have MAC capabilities, and could probably be configured to pass at least EAL3 (not sure about the design verification requirements for getting EAL4), but like OpenBSD it lacks a massive, financially-interested organisation to sponsor it through all the testing. Note the RHEL5 was sponsored by IBM, not by RedHat, which gives a very clear indication of just how much financial backing is necessary to seriously attempt to get a system certified under the Common Criteria. Getting an EAL certification, as the Wikipedia entry on the topic states, is not a significant indicator of the security of a system. It just shows that the system was tested against certain criteria and passed.
Slashdot Mirror
My 1996 Nissan Primera, which has four-wheel-drive just to increase its consumption, can get around 440km of urban driving off a single tank. On a long trip (such as Auckland to Wellington) I regularly achieve in excess of 600km from a tank. That's nearer 400 miles than 300. In an older car, with the extra drive-train losses from powering all four wheels. I'm not a particularly conservative driver, either, in terms of my acceleration habits - I don't exceed the posted limits, but I like to get there as quickly as possible.
From the article: "Then there's the secretive Tarahumara tribe, the best long-distance runners in the world. These are a people who live in basic conditions in Mexico, often in caves without running water, and run with only strips of old tyre or leather thongs strapped to the bottom of their feet. They are virtually barefoot." Virtually barefoot. Which is to say not barefoot at all. These 'best runners in the world' have decided that they need footwear.
Yeah. "Old tyre or leather thongs". That's called "Stopping my feet getting all cut to shit as I run across the rocky ground" not "I've got crap technique and use these shoes to try and compensate". Not even vaguely comparable. One has a function related in no way to the running, but in every way to the protection of the feet from the ground. The other is all about the running, and not just protecting the feet from the ground but also about protecting the joints from the impact of the feet impacting the ground. Do you actually not see the total lack of correlation?
Now, maybe you're in the U.K. or somewhere in Europe, but my understanding is, at least in the U.S., is that truth is an absolute defense.
Can't speak for Europe, but it's definitely the same in the UK (and countries that derive from its legal traditions, such as New Zealand). Can't recall the name of the case, but it was affirmed by a rock artist's manager who outed the artist's public sanctimony on drugs, sex, etc, as totally hypocritical given their narcotics-fuelled benders and various "immoral" carryings-on. Funnily enough the artist sued, and the manager was vindicated by proving that it was all true.
$15k worth of hardware? Are you gold-plating the case, so they'll think it must be good? I'd be pushing it to spend NZD15k on a top-notch OpenBSD box, and we're currently at USD0.54/NZD!
Unless you're putting in 10GbE NICs, I guess, though that's getting a wee bit too bleeding edge for my liking in terms of support in OpenBSD.
I think you mean LA, not CA. The only state in the union that uses civil law rather than common law is Louisiana, and that's courtesy of their French heritage.
California may have codified some areas of legislation, but it's definitely not a civil law state. Most common law jurisdictions (I live in New Zealand, which is one of them) have some codified legislation, but that doesn't mean they have civil law systems.
Ably assisted by Dubbyah making FEMA a sub-agency of DHS, which appears to be the most incompetent agency in existence - a title that takes some doing, I know.
As soon as you make emergency managers part of a body that's all about finding "t3h terrists", you change its focus and direction. Whether or not FEMA was a charlie foxtrot before 11/9 is a point for argument, I'm sure, but since being subsumed into DHS it's been an unstoppable toboggan ride into the abyss of bureaucratic hell.
If you want to see how emergency management should be run, look to the Coasties. They saved 33.5k people after Katrina, and they have fewer than 40k staff! They don't insist on kicking decisions about the colour of Post-It notes up to national command level, which means they're agile and can respond quickly. Local commanders have authority to make decisions, and that's that. The closure of NY Harbour after the planes crashed was ordered by the port captain, without having to check with his boss, or his boss' boss. Same with Baltimore/Washington. That is how an emergency organisation needs to think and function. Instead, DHS and all its subsidiary parts (with the exception of USCG, it seems) are all about buck-passing and central control.
It was telling that, in the wake of Katrina, one Louisiana sheriff said "I'd blow up FEMA and ask the Coastguard what it needs."
Yeah, pretty much. As someone else said, b uses a different modulation to g. The change from DSSS to OFDM was mostly about more-efficient use of spectrum, without utilising more of the spectrum.
Since copyright cases frequently get cited cross-jurisdictionally in regards to what can and can't be copyrighted, there is case law from Commonwealth (UK and NZ) courts that says that both rules and layouts for games can be copyrighted.
I don't have the lecture material handy, since I took the course last semester, but in an IP law paper the lecturer discussed cases on both. In one, it was held that the design of a coupon for playing football pools could be copyrighted (Sun Newspapers rings a bell, but I've encountered them so many times in the course of studying commercial law over the last three years that I wouldn't take it as gospel.) In another, a fantasy rugby game was ripped off. The court held that the combination of player selections, number of players, etc, was so utterly unique (and distinct from any form of rugby actually played) that it was inconceivable that the defendant came up with the exact same combination themselves, thus the defendant had copied directly and in an infringing manner. I can't recall the name of that case at all, and the law library databases aren't much help. I'll check the details when I get home tonight.
The key thing with copyright is that a concept cannot be copyrighted. It is the representation of the idea, not the idea itself, that is protected. The layout of the Scrabble board is clearly copyrightable - premium square values and placements, 15x15 board, and so on. Likewise the rules, such as the 50-point bonus for a bingo (laying all seven tiles in one play) and the double-scoring opening word. Scrabulous hasn't got a leg to stand on for breaching copyright, because they've so clearly copied wholesale from Scrabble.
As for arguing against myself, I was arguing against my post's parent suggesting that UK law doesn't recognise performance right. It does.
While you're working on your comprehension, grow some nads of your own and get an account.
1) YouTube is American, based in America, subject to US copyright law. It doesn't matter a damn where Radiohead is from, because the jurisdiction that counts is the one where the law is being applied. The DMCA is a 'merkin invention, being used on a 'merkin site. Ergo, Radiohead's country-of-origin is irrelevant.
2) Performance right is recognised in UK copyright law. So Prince is entitled to copyright in his performance of the song, even though he does not hold the copyright in the lyrics or the musical score.
If Prince failed to get the appropriate licence to perform the song, as others have noted Radiohead have a course of action for breach of copyright in the lyrics and/or score. They have no grounds to get the video restored, because they don't hold the copyright in the performance and that's the right that the video infringes.
What is it about Linux that says that hardware that's better-supported in the BSDs than in Linux is considered to not have open-source drivers?
Here in New Zealand, we had a case just last year where an offender armed with a hammer got fatally shot after getting within two metres (or one metre depending on which media report you follow) of an armed cop who was ordering him to put down the weapon. He was closer than our police SOPs state is an acceptable distance for engaging an armed suspect, but there is unlikely to be any fallout in that regard for the officer involved. He was there, he made the call, that's his job. Until such time as the US gets over its obsession with suing anyone and everyone for everything that could possibly have been their fault, your cops will continue to resort to excessive force because it's the only way they can ensure they won't be censured for not using enough force. Fucking idiotic!
So, you were saying...? Fucking ignorant Yanks!
Posting a story like that would be a sure-fire way to make Big Blue's stock drop like a hot rock, and you'd have shareholders on your arse faster than GNAA members at an orgy.
If the SEC thought it had been done with the intent of manipulating the market for gain, though, you'd be wishing that it was just shareholders and the GNAA after your arse. Coz there'd be a strong likelihood that your arse would become property of Bubba.
I'm not a trained emergency response driver, but when I was in the Fire Service here I rode as front-seat passenger more than a few times in vehicles responding as urgent traffic. Emergency drivers know the dimensions of their vehicle, and they know its maneuvering limitations. They can deal better with your car being a stationary obstacle than a moving one, especially since they cannot read the minds of other drivers.
The other thing to consider is that most jurisdictions will not give a waiver of liability to a driver who goes through a red light to allow an emergency vehicle through. If you're in a crash, you ran a red light. You might be able to escape prosecution for a minor crash, but your insurance company is still going to hold you liable.
The thing to consider is that SA requires That could be a problem when trying to get the various old-versions-of-Word things to work, since the "intellectual rights" to "FuckShitUpLikeWord97" and "BreakCrapLikeWord95" are a) inextricably tied into the spec and b) absolutely not going to be forthcoming from MS for anyone who wants to actually produce a complete, fully-compliant implementation. Anyone think they even have those things defined in writing? I don't!
I'd say this one is game, set, and match to ODF. OOXML just cannot fulfill the access requirements if anyone tries to actually implement it in its entirety, and since it sounds like SA is on a total OSS kick one can probably safely assume that they will be demanding multiple implementations that comply down to every last comma, semi-colon and full-stop.
The poster obviously read TFA, and noticed that the objection these people have is that they don't have clearances, don't want clearances, but are being expected to grant access to the same level of information about their lives as if they DID have clearances.
If you don't work on matters of national security, where is the concern with improper influence or motives? If someone's job puts them in a position where they might pose a threat to the safety of the country, they ought to be vetted and cleared appropriately. If not, filling out a questionnaire ought to be sufficient - though some of those questions are pretty fucking nosey, IMO, given that this is simply for getting an access card to allow you into places you've been going in the past anyway.
Depending on what you're buying, extended warranty can be a very good thing. One of my housemates owns the washing machine, and bought the extended warranty for an extra five years. Another case of "in the nick of time" cover, because the drum over-balance sensor corroded and started to fail a couple of months before the end of the warranty period. Out-of-warranty repair of the sensor is about $150, but it cost us bupkis.
As the GP said, BMI is a bullshit measure.
On a side note, FreeBSD does have MAC capabilities, and could probably be configured to pass at least EAL3 (not sure about the design verification requirements for getting EAL4), but like OpenBSD it lacks a massive, financially-interested organisation to sponsor it through all the testing. Note the RHEL5 was sponsored by IBM, not by RedHat, which gives a very clear indication of just how much financial backing is necessary to seriously attempt to get a system certified under the Common Criteria. Getting an EAL certification, as the Wikipedia entry on the topic states, is not a significant indicator of the security of a system. It just shows that the system was tested against certain criteria and passed.
Seriously, don't people know about the 12pm rule anymore?