If materials science advanced to the point where a starship could get close to the speed of light without the crew becoming a sticky goo on the side of the corridors, remain in geostationary orbit, remain pressurized at one atmosphere even when orbiting a large star, I'd be rather worried if it couldn't handle the pressure increase going deep into the ocean.
Professor Farnsworth explained it best:
Leela: Depth at 45 hundred feet, 48 hundred, 50 hundred! 5000 feet! Farnsworth: Dear Lord, that's over 150 atmospheres of pressure. Fry: How many atmospheres can this ship withstand? Farnsworth: Well it's a spaceship, so I'd say anywhere between zero and one.
That still isn't self-consistent and makes no sense.
If "A" has a patent and licenses it to "B" to make a product using said patent, why does "C" who buys the product from "B" need to pay anyone other than "B"?
Also where does it end?
You say if "C" buys a product from "B" who licensed a patent from "A", you claim both "B" must pay "A", and somehow "C" must pay both "B" and "A". If "D" buys that product from "C", now "D" must pay both "C" and "A". If "E" buys that product from "D", now "E" must pay both "D" and "A".
The detail is, why do you say the "end user" is excluded? Especially considering the fact that I as an end user could be any one of the above letters!
"A" holds a patent. "B" makes a chip using patented method, so pays "A" a license fee. "C" makes a carrier board containing the chip "B" makes, so pays "B" for their already licensed chip, but "A" wants paid a second time. "D" makes a module containing the carrier board made by "C" and so pays "C" for their board containing the already licensed chip. "E" makes a peripheral containing "D"s module, so pays "D" for their already-licensed-three-times-now product.
I am "F" the end-user who pays "E" for the thing they make to plug into my computer. Why must I pay "E" and "A" both?
You first claim I as an end user don't need to pay "A", but you continue to say anyone who sells a product must pay "A" again. So if I am finished with the product I bought from "E", perhaps I would like to sell it on ebay or something. Now I am selling a product containing "A"s patented method, which you later say I do have to pay "A" for, even though I am an end user which you said I don't have to pay "A" for.
And all this time "A" has been paid seven times for ONE chip "B" already paid for!
If "A" sells licenses for $5 per unit, well "B" makes the units and pays $5 each. Why should "C" and "D" and "E" and "F" (and whomever I sell it to on ebay) each also have to pay "A" another $5?
At this point that "A" somehow has made $35 for this one unit that is supposed to be $5/unit!
The end point here is, only one of two things can be true: A) The license for the patent goes with the hardware, in which case only "B" pays "A" and that is it. or B) The license for the patent does NOT go with the hardware, in which case only the end-user must pay for that unit, B, C, D, and E no longer have the hardware so don't need to also pay the same $5/unit cost
You can't claim the answer is both yes and no at the same time.
You are a researcher if you buy the software, install it, and then see what you can do. If you try to get into a system belonging to someone else, you are a fucking criminal.
You are aware the researcher simply saw a "HIV dating site database dump.zip" up on bittorrent and decided to inform the site owner that he may want to check that shit out to see if it is theirs and if so maybe fix their site up, right?
If I found something of yours across town in the middle of the street, that you put your own name and address on, why am I a criminal for returning it to you or informing you where I found it, if I am not the one that took it and put it there?
ahem. Are you aware that Qualcomm (it has two m's), had nearly nothing to do with the development of GSM as they were pushing their CDMA technology? Regards A former Ericsson engineer.
Then why is the Qualcomm name on the transceiver chip in the iphone 6? Infineon is the name on the chip in the iphone 3.
Why is Ericsson's name no where to be found? Sounds like your company got paid by Qualcomm / Infineon and now want to double dip.
If they can legally go after 3rd hand parties to the purchase, then nothing is stopping them from suing me as a 4th hand party as well. This action also harms me directly since I can't resell or even give away any of my phones, since even someone receiving it for free also owes Ericsson money for the patents yet again.
That is not a good situation, no matter how you spin it.
Erickson actually paid for the R&D to create something new
Erickson was also PAID for that something new, by Qualcom to make the GSM radio chip that Apple bought from them.
There is no justification Erickson should be paid multiple times for a single license.
Or if there is, why isn't it the responsibility of us end-users to pay Erickson, since we haven't paid for what the cell phone maker paid for and the radio chip maker also paid for?
The problem is that the USB port now requires a special cable which not all of us have lying around in quantity. It doesn't make it impossible, but it does make it more of a hassle.
Micro USB is hardly a "special cable" by any stretch. It's the same cable and connector all of the raspberry pi models use for power
Pretty much all tablets and smart phones except Apples use them these days. Also a good number of USB wall chargers typically have a USB-A on them and include a USB-A to Micro USB cable.
I was quite saddened to see most Slashdot posters don't even have a cheap-o $5 USB keyboard or ten laying around, and not including one with the original Pi being labeled "a deal breaker" - but really, no one around these parts has massive piles of both of those parts and more laying around anymore?
Which one is sub-$10? Unless you get your hands on the MagPi or live near one of the twenty-five Micro Center locations in the USA
The later being exactly what I did. The Pi Zeros were $5 each, and I now have two of them. The CHIP isn't being sold anywhere yet, either online nor Microcenter.
I don't have to provide alternative explanation to point out that what I see here is an ungrounded assertion. They're trying to manipulate facts to match the theory, not the other way around like actual scientists do.
No actually you DO have to provide an explanation. We observe things happening. We are trying to make an explanation why they are happening.
Your claim that "they are not happening" when all observations and evidence and facts show 100% of the time over a few trillions of observations that your claim is WRONG.
It's completely on your head to show why your already-proven-incorrect "thought" is not wrong.
The facts you claim are being manipulated are right there in front of your face with no manipulation by anyone - except yourself of course, who keeps insisting the facts must be ignored because they don't fit your personal crazy "theory"
Computers just aren't good at all at that sort of thing.
It's a simple trivial problem that doesn't need any AI to solve. One variable and a couple IF statements is all that is required.
Have the car reset a counter at midnight to zero. For each person the car runs over and kills, increment the counter by one. Once that counter reaches 2999, shut down the engine and refuse to start until the next day.
If self driving cars limit themselves to less than 3000 people killed on the road per day, they will already be safer and kill less humans that our current situation with human driven cars, so the self-driving cars empirically win.
Disclaimer: I'm not arguing GPs point. Or Ps point. Or your point. Oh wait you are P. Better Disclaimer: I have no point, best not to read further. If you would like your time returned, please send a stamped self addressed envelope to my gmail account, and I'll send you the GNU date source code. Please allow 4 to 6 weeks for delivery.
When Grandma asks you who makes the best computers, do you answer "Cray", or "HP/Dell/Lenovo"?
Well if MY grandma, passed over 15 years ago now, asked me who makes the best computers, I'd probably answer Cray too.
And then send her off to God for the best tech support ever.
I bet he could get that damn tulip module to compile first try too!
But I'm just that kind of jerk I guess;}
In all seriousness... well some... or a little at least... well I tried. OK that isn't true. But if someone elses grandma, not passed over 15 years ago now, asked me that I'd actually have no idea what to answer. I think HP has pissed me off the least lately, but that isn't to be taken as they don't very much suck. Dell sort of sucks the opposite of HP for me. Lenovo on the low end is just disasterly. And yes I greatly fear for my beloved xSeries future in their hands:{
On the other hand, I say this as someone who has one of those $15k HP-UX machines in my basement, along with an equally expensive SGI o2, a Next cube and two Next slabs, and numerous Sparc desktops.
Come to think of it, I'm significantly less qualified to answer here than you are:P
True, but at the time that RFC didn't exist. And a lot of software had a hard-coded rule about TLDs: ccTLDs were 2 characters, the generic TLDs were 3 characters and only a few were valid. Trying to use a TLD with more than 3 characters would make some software reject it as invalid, but it was easy to pick a 3-character TLD that was guaranteed not to exist in the global DNS.
Thankfully we've moved past that stage. Though I would like to see a special-use domain "local" defined for names that aren't for testing but are restricted to the organization's network.
Even those rules are wrong, and were wrong back in the day.
The very first TLD for example is 4 characters, and that TLD exists and is in use to this very day.
(And no matter how wrong it is, it's always fun to stick an A record in your.arpa reverse-zone to an IP pointing back to its own PTR!)
Thankfully I've never run into any program that rejected.arpa as a valid TLD in my 25 years on the network. Much fun on IRC it was.
But even so, I haven't used anything but.test.invalid and.example since 2000 per the RFC. Somewhat ironically though, your.ttk test-tld still seems to not exist, where as the.xxx test-tld I used does.
Even more ironic (or just sad) it was right around the time that RFC was published that none other than Microsoft started using.local as a defacto standard for a LAN TLD on Windows networks, a practice that continued right up until CAs begun to refuse signing.local domain names for Exchange servers (In 2012 or so? I can't quite remember)
Of course instead of pushing to make.local a true global standard in the root zones, Microsoft just threw up their hands and said "Fuck it, we don't know, just go get some insanely long.com domain to type in front of all your usernames from now on or something."
Actually deep freeze uses copy-on-write files that store all changes post-boot, and that file gets deleted upon booting.
That way a reboot only has the additional time of a file delete (usually an unclean unlink as well, which is much faster) instead of however long an image restore would take.
I've been on the lookout for an open source solution to take the place of deep freeze for almost a decade now, and I've never found anything available for Windows or that is generic for any OS.
If restores-on-demand are OK, then clonezilla works great. Take an image, and run it through the bootable image maker option. It creates essentially a bootable restore disk. This can be written to a separate/second hard drive or partition and booted from as needed to restore to your last good state.
But it makes it much more risky to take new images (potentially long after an infection has occurred but not been triggered or discovered yet) to get new applications installed into it or the latest security updates and AV definitions.
It's a give and take sort of thing with both plenty of upsides and downsides as well.
Alternately deep freeze is a much less annoying solution to use, it just isn't open source. But at least the price is pretty reasonable IMHO.
Looks like video games match every single English definition of the word "art" out there:
art - noun \'art\
* something that is created with imagination and skill and that is beautiful or that expresses important ideas or feelings * works created by artists : paintings, sculptures, etc., that are created to be beautiful or to express important ideas or feelings * the methods and skills used for painting, sculpting, drawing, etc. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/art
* The expression or application of human creative skill and imagination, typically in a visual form such as painting or sculpture, producing works to be appreciated primarily for their beauty or emotional power * Works produced by human creative skill and imagination * Creative activity resulting in the production of paintings, drawings, or sculpture http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/american_english/art
If I walk into your house through the unlocked front door while you are not home, does it protect me from trespassing charges if while I am there I made your bed and did your dishes?
In that case, just because I can call you a tresspasser, doesn't mean it is proper to also call you a bed-messer-upper or a dish-dirtier.
Malware is software that harms you. This is not malware. No one said it wasn't an infection, or a virus if you prefer, because that it certainly is.
After which the new tab preference will be pretty unimportant in the overall scheme of things. Although to be fair, they will force-expire that random guys plugin a few dozen times between now and then no doubt:P
Making the "Umlimited" plan only actually 100GB (before you get throttled like everybody else who goes over their limit; TMoUS never actually kills your data connection) would be pretty reasonable, I think
You know what would be more reasonable than making your Unlimited plan only actually 100GB?
Making your 100GB plan only actually 100GB, followed by one of either making your unlimited plan unlimited, or making your unlimited plan non-existent.
Slashdot Mirror
If materials science advanced to the point where a starship could get close to the speed of light without the crew becoming a sticky goo on the side of the corridors, remain in geostationary orbit, remain pressurized at one atmosphere even when orbiting a large star, I'd be rather worried if it couldn't handle the pressure increase going deep into the ocean.
Professor Farnsworth explained it best:
Leela: Depth at 45 hundred feet, 48 hundred, 50 hundred! 5000 feet!
Farnsworth: Dear Lord, that's over 150 atmospheres of pressure.
Fry: How many atmospheres can this ship withstand?
Farnsworth: Well it's a spaceship, so I'd say anywhere between zero and one.
The LCD is pitch black. Your data cap is likely to be eaten by a grue.
That still isn't self-consistent and makes no sense.
If "A" has a patent and licenses it to "B" to make a product using said patent, why does "C" who buys the product from "B" need to pay anyone other than "B"?
Also where does it end?
You say if "C" buys a product from "B" who licensed a patent from "A", you claim both "B" must pay "A", and somehow "C" must pay both "B" and "A".
If "D" buys that product from "C", now "D" must pay both "C" and "A".
If "E" buys that product from "D", now "E" must pay both "D" and "A".
The detail is, why do you say the "end user" is excluded? Especially considering the fact that I as an end user could be any one of the above letters!
"A" holds a patent.
"B" makes a chip using patented method, so pays "A" a license fee.
"C" makes a carrier board containing the chip "B" makes, so pays "B" for their already licensed chip, but "A" wants paid a second time.
"D" makes a module containing the carrier board made by "C" and so pays "C" for their board containing the already licensed chip.
"E" makes a peripheral containing "D"s module, so pays "D" for their already-licensed-three-times-now product.
I am "F" the end-user who pays "E" for the thing they make to plug into my computer. Why must I pay "E" and "A" both?
You first claim I as an end user don't need to pay "A", but you continue to say anyone who sells a product must pay "A" again.
So if I am finished with the product I bought from "E", perhaps I would like to sell it on ebay or something. Now I am selling a product containing "A"s patented method, which you later say I do have to pay "A" for, even though I am an end user which you said I don't have to pay "A" for.
And all this time "A" has been paid seven times for ONE chip "B" already paid for!
If "A" sells licenses for $5 per unit, well "B" makes the units and pays $5 each.
Why should "C" and "D" and "E" and "F" (and whomever I sell it to on ebay) each also have to pay "A" another $5?
At this point that "A" somehow has made $35 for this one unit that is supposed to be $5/unit!
The end point here is, only one of two things can be true:
A) The license for the patent goes with the hardware, in which case only "B" pays "A" and that is it.
or
B) The license for the patent does NOT go with the hardware, in which case only the end-user must pay for that unit, B, C, D, and E no longer have the hardware so don't need to also pay the same $5/unit cost
You can't claim the answer is both yes and no at the same time.
You are a researcher if you buy the software, install it, and then see what you can do. If you try to get into a system belonging to someone else, you are a fucking criminal.
You are aware the researcher simply saw a "HIV dating site database dump.zip" up on bittorrent and decided to inform the site owner that he may want to check that shit out to see if it is theirs and if so maybe fix their site up, right?
If I found something of yours across town in the middle of the street, that you put your own name and address on, why am I a criminal for returning it to you or informing you where I found it, if I am not the one that took it and put it there?
ahem. Are you aware that Qualcomm (it has two m's), had nearly nothing to do with the development of GSM as they were pushing their CDMA technology?
Regards
A former Ericsson engineer.
Then why is the Qualcomm name on the transceiver chip in the iphone 6?
Infineon is the name on the chip in the iphone 3.
Why is Ericsson's name no where to be found? Sounds like your company got paid by Qualcomm / Infineon and now want to double dip.
If they can legally go after 3rd hand parties to the purchase, then nothing is stopping them from suing me as a 4th hand party as well.
This action also harms me directly since I can't resell or even give away any of my phones, since even someone receiving it for free also owes Ericsson money for the patents yet again.
That is not a good situation, no matter how you spin it.
Erickson actually paid for the R&D to create something new
Erickson was also PAID for that something new, by Qualcom to make the GSM radio chip that Apple bought from them.
There is no justification Erickson should be paid multiple times for a single license.
Or if there is, why isn't it the responsibility of us end-users to pay Erickson, since we haven't paid for what the cell phone maker paid for and the radio chip maker also paid for?
The problem is that the USB port now requires a special cable which not all of us have lying around in quantity. It doesn't make it impossible, but it does make it more of a hassle.
Micro USB is hardly a "special cable" by any stretch.
It's the same cable and connector all of the raspberry pi models use for power
Pretty much all tablets and smart phones except Apples use them these days.
Also a good number of USB wall chargers typically have a USB-A on them and include a USB-A to Micro USB cable.
I was quite saddened to see most Slashdot posters don't even have a cheap-o $5 USB keyboard or ten laying around, and not including one with the original Pi being labeled "a deal breaker" - but really, no one around these parts has massive piles of both of those parts and more laying around anymore?
Which one is sub-$10?
Unless you get your hands on the MagPi or live near one of the twenty-five Micro Center locations in the USA
The later being exactly what I did. The Pi Zeros were $5 each, and I now have two of them.
The CHIP isn't being sold anywhere yet, either online nor Microcenter.
So the answer to your question is "The Pi Zero"
Without Systemd Wiki: http://without-systemd.org/wik...
I don't have to provide alternative explanation to point out that what I see here is an ungrounded assertion. They're trying to manipulate facts to match the theory, not the other way around like actual scientists do.
No actually you DO have to provide an explanation.
We observe things happening. We are trying to make an explanation why they are happening.
Your claim that "they are not happening" when all observations and evidence and facts show 100% of the time over a few trillions of observations that your claim is WRONG.
It's completely on your head to show why your already-proven-incorrect "thought" is not wrong.
The facts you claim are being manipulated are right there in front of your face with no manipulation by anyone - except yourself of course, who keeps insisting the facts must be ignored because they don't fit your personal crazy "theory"
So get to explaining
Hello Mr or Ms Victim,
Please lift your telephone handset, dial the following toll number, and place the receiver into the acoustically coupled modem connected to 0x3F8.
Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter.
Sincerely yours -- Mr Virus
Computers just aren't good at all at that sort of thing.
It's a simple trivial problem that doesn't need any AI to solve. One variable and a couple IF statements is all that is required.
Have the car reset a counter at midnight to zero. For each person the car runs over and kills, increment the counter by one.
Once that counter reaches 2999, shut down the engine and refuse to start until the next day.
If self driving cars limit themselves to less than 3000 people killed on the road per day, they will already be safer and kill less humans that our current situation with human driven cars, so the self-driving cars empirically win.
Cingular is AT&T wireless now, so the same company and the same patent.
Basically AT&T the parent company sold "AT&T Wireless" off to Cingular, and Cingular renamed itself under the "AT&T Wireless" name.
Comon FBI, if you're going to stoop to being just as bad as the bad guys, what the fuck are you even bothering fighting the bad guys for?
How about a real story arc?
Wow! I mean sure that would be wonderful and amazing after all, but that's still quite a big demand from most of those involved.
And here I was going to plead and beg just for no Neelix, no warp ten salamander sex, and no stories revolving around any child actors.
Disclaimer: I'm not arguing GPs point. Or Ps point. Or your point. Oh wait you are P.
Better Disclaimer: I have no point, best not to read further. If you would like your time returned, please send a stamped self addressed envelope to my gmail account, and I'll send you the GNU date source code. Please allow 4 to 6 weeks for delivery.
When Grandma asks you who makes the best computers, do you answer "Cray", or "HP/Dell/Lenovo"?
Well if MY grandma, passed over 15 years ago now, asked me who makes the best computers, I'd probably answer Cray too.
And then send her off to God for the best tech support ever.
I bet he could get that damn tulip module to compile first try too!
But I'm just that kind of jerk I guess ;}
In all seriousness... well some... or a little at least... well I tried. OK that isn't true. But if someone elses grandma, not passed over 15 years ago now, asked me that I'd actually have no idea what to answer. :{
I think HP has pissed me off the least lately, but that isn't to be taken as they don't very much suck. Dell sort of sucks the opposite of HP for me.
Lenovo on the low end is just disasterly. And yes I greatly fear for my beloved xSeries future in their hands
On the other hand, I say this as someone who has one of those $15k HP-UX machines in my basement, along with an equally expensive SGI o2, a Next cube and two Next slabs, and numerous Sparc desktops.
Come to think of it, I'm significantly less qualified to answer here than you are :P
Sorry, but I have no clue what a pre-certificate is. Google search doesn't seem to help me either.
I assumed they meant a premium certificate, aka a class 3 EV (extended validation) certificate or higher.
It's just marketing bullshit pretty much, and the only difference is some flags set in the cert when its signed by the CA.
True, but at the time that RFC didn't exist. And a lot of software had a hard-coded rule about TLDs: ccTLDs were 2 characters, the generic TLDs were 3 characters and only a few were valid. Trying to use a TLD with more than 3 characters would make some software reject it as invalid, but it was easy to pick a 3-character TLD that was guaranteed not to exist in the global DNS.
Thankfully we've moved past that stage. Though I would like to see a special-use domain "local" defined for names that aren't for testing but are restricted to the organization's network.
Even those rules are wrong, and were wrong back in the day.
The very first TLD for example is 4 characters, and that TLD exists and is in use to this very day.
(And no matter how wrong it is, it's always fun to stick an A record in your .arpa reverse-zone to an IP pointing back to its own PTR!)
Thankfully I've never run into any program that rejected .arpa as a valid TLD in my 25 years on the network.
Much fun on IRC it was.
But even so, I haven't used anything but .test .invalid and .example since 2000 per the RFC. .ttk test-tld still seems to not exist, where as the .xxx test-tld I used does.
Somewhat ironically though, your
Even more ironic (or just sad) it was right around the time that RFC was published that none other than Microsoft started using .local as a defacto standard for a LAN TLD on Windows networks, a practice that continued right up until CAs begun to refuse signing .local domain names for Exchange servers (In 2012 or so? I can't quite remember)
Of course instead of pushing to make .local a true global standard in the root zones, Microsoft just threw up their hands and said "Fuck it, we don't know, just go get some insanely long .com domain to type in front of all your usernames from now on or something."
I'm not sure how to interpret "swirls of electricity", either in terms of particles or in terms of field theory...
I'm pretty sure they just attached a few arc welders to a novelty sized pinwheel on a stick, mounted to the front of the skateboard.
At least that's what I imagine I would have done just before uttering the phrase "swirls of electricity"
Actually deep freeze uses copy-on-write files that store all changes post-boot, and that file gets deleted upon booting.
That way a reboot only has the additional time of a file delete (usually an unclean unlink as well, which is much faster) instead of however long an image restore would take.
I've been on the lookout for an open source solution to take the place of deep freeze for almost a decade now, and I've never found anything available for Windows or that is generic for any OS.
If restores-on-demand are OK, then clonezilla works great.
Take an image, and run it through the bootable image maker option. It creates essentially a bootable restore disk.
This can be written to a separate/second hard drive or partition and booted from as needed to restore to your last good state.
But it makes it much more risky to take new images (potentially long after an infection has occurred but not been triggered or discovered yet) to get new applications installed into it or the latest security updates and AV definitions.
It's a give and take sort of thing with both plenty of upsides and downsides as well.
Alternately deep freeze is a much less annoying solution to use, it just isn't open source. But at least the price is pretty reasonable IMHO.
Looks like video games match every single English definition of the word "art" out there:
art - noun \'art\
* something that is created with imagination and skill and that is beautiful or that expresses important ideas or feelings
* works created by artists : paintings, sculptures, etc., that are created to be beautiful or to express important ideas or feelings
* the methods and skills used for painting, sculpting, drawing, etc.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/art
* The expression or application of human creative skill and imagination, typically in a visual form such as painting or sculpture, producing works to be appreciated primarily for their beauty or emotional power
* Works produced by human creative skill and imagination
* Creative activity resulting in the production of paintings, drawings, or sculpture
http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/american_english/art
Is doing good things, that's not malware.
If I walk into your house through the unlocked front door while you are not home, does it protect me from trespassing charges if while I am there I made your bed and did your dishes?
In that case, just because I can call you a tresspasser, doesn't mean it is proper to also call you a bed-messer-upper or a dish-dirtier.
Malware is software that harms you. This is not malware. No one said it wasn't an infection, or a virus if you prefer, because that it certainly is.
I just don't understand the mentality.
It's just one more step in their grand master plan to remove all web browsing functionality from their web browser, announced back in April '15.
They already approved their decision to remove HTTP support from Firefox over the next year:
https://blog.mozilla.org/secur...
After which the new tab preference will be pretty unimportant in the overall scheme of things. :P
Although to be fair, they will force-expire that random guys plugin a few dozen times between now and then no doubt
Making the "Umlimited" plan only actually 100GB (before you get throttled like everybody else who goes over their limit; TMoUS never actually kills your data connection) would be pretty reasonable, I think
You know what would be more reasonable than making your Unlimited plan only actually 100GB?
Making your 100GB plan only actually 100GB, followed by one of either making your unlimited plan unlimited, or making your unlimited plan non-existent.
A plain magnet from a toy store has a stronger field.
What toy stores do you frequent that carry magnets radiating a kilowatt per square meter of energy?
Could you pick me up one?