"Simultaneous raids are also said to have been carried out in The Netherlands, Belgium, Norway, Germany, Great Britain, the Czech Republic and Hungary."
Sweden (1904), Netherlands (1912), Belgium (1887), Norway (1896), Germany (1887), Great Britain (1887), Czech Republic (1993), and Hungary (1904) have all signed the Berne Convention among other agreements.
Sweden may have fairly loose laws when it comes to "sharing" protected work, but it also has international obligations that may seem more burdensome now than they did back in 1904.
I wonder if ACTA will have similar unforeseen consequences in one hundred years as today's act of file transmission and duplication was likely not considered back in the day of ink and presses.
And rule out ~1/6 of the current availability of human resources and future (and in some cases current) market potential? If the company is publicly traded, the stock holders may be able to make a good case about this being an illegal business decision because it's not in the company's best fiscal interest (The company would have to have a business case for why pulling out would cost them less than merely allowing a sovereign power access to data (presumably secure and having legal authority to do so - the fourth amendment is not a universal legal right (human right is another question))).
I think it's more of what is meant by priority traffic. If priority traffic happens to be users who pay more for a higher bandwidth cap then I don't see a problem - there's definitely an infrastructure cost if a user wants more than the standard line will deliver to their location (or the provider has to put in a bigger node so there isn't a pinch point). The entire issue seems to be an artifact of how we bill for internet usage. Billing entirely based on pipe size is absurd when the cost to the service is actually a function of total data sent and received.
How would you react if your electric company told you there was a flat rate on your 200 amp household service and that it was going to be more expensive just because your neighbor happens to like using his welder as a full spectrum light source every night (or you pay out for CF bulbs and he or she doesn't)? I'd even bet that some people would take to running a salamander in the back yard all summer just to "stick it to 'em." If you've ever needed more juice you may have to pay an initial fee for a 400 amp service (and maybe not) but after that it's pretty much based on what you use (some places might have a nominal recurring fee based on increased maintenance). Some industrial locations will pay a premium for guaranteed service (or guaranteed first back up service) but they may also get volume discounts - nobody seems to complain about that.
If we're talking about something other than neutral to the content of the traffic then it is not net neutrality. If we're talking about a provider making decisions and pricing based exclusively on quantity and rate of traffic than that should still be within the bounds of net neutrality.
Sure, I'd love to see a flat rate determined by a third party (government?) at a set percentage of profit of which another set percentage must go back into infrastructure improvement, but I am not convinced that such a system would work out the way I'd envision it's implementation and success.
Also, these numbers tend to only take into account operating efficiency. It's not really a true measure of the vehicle efficiency.
I'd also like to see product creation and lifetime taken into account if we're going to talk about the environmental impact of the vehicle. What's better: a Subaru gasoline vehicle made at a zero landfill facility but having mediocre mpg due to all wheel drive, or a Prius which has high mpg but will require a few battery replacements and disposals over it's lifetime? Speaking of lifetime, what's the average mileage when the vehicle hits the junk yard - buying vehicles which need replacement every 7 years instead of 10 has a big impact too.
Would you need the light source to be in front of the display (instead of back-lit) in such a case? Holograms function off of the grating or double-slit phenomena of interfering light. Also, would you be doing the separate red green blue laser illumination of modern color holograms or would we find a cheaper/safer/less complicated method of using a white light? Or would these be self illuminating pixels where there's a graphics driver calculating the light phase and interference patterns... Sorry... the pondering has gotten away from me, I think I'm going to stop now before I self nerd snipe.
Having Charles I kick the Puritans asses out of England was probably a really good idea...
...our culture is just too young with regard to some moral aspects of society.
Certainly some things are...better developed over there [Europe], such a more adult attitude to nudity...
Those are the things I was seeing when I assumed you were saying the European views on nudity and sexuality are "superior" to the US views.
Perhaps I am at fault for not reading your articulated phrases clearly enough. Please help me understand how the above are neutral statements and have no connotation implying the "superiority" of one view over the other.
With an active display you can use software to account for parallax for a single user (or multiple users with very similar points of view).
It's been done already with webcams and video conferencing, computer monitors, and even a fake office window (using a wiimote I think - I couldn't find the video where I thought it was though. It showed San Francisco in the distance though - maybe someone else remembers where it is).
You're right about multiple viewers being a pretty trick.
Every layer of polarization cuts the available light in half. Creating a display with pixels smaller than the unaided eye can view without these is actually huge because the current limit in preventing a "realistic" display (i.e. you can't tell the difference between the display and looking out a window) is actually in the contrast resolution (difference between light and dark) which still has a very long way to go before it hits human eye capacity. Freeing up more light allows for brighter whites and perhaps even the possibility of layering displays to get darker blacks (depending on the transparency of "black.")
Yes the American and English cultures diverged a few hundred years back. Which means we're different not inferior. If we seem more violent then perhaps there's a reason behind the desensitization toward distant and/or fictional occurrences such as the far more personal association we have when we still to this day need to worry about our children being eaten by the wildlife on their way to school.
Perhaps instead of condemning the US culture it may be worth asking "why?" do the US and Europe have different views on sexuality and nudity. And before you call the US position of viewing sexuality as a more private aspect than Europeans view it "wrong," you may wish to ask "does it cause unjust harm?" (Such as withholding suffrage, property inheritance, educational, or human rights). Cultural judgments are a tricky thing and obviously a majority (because we are a republic) of the culture here has a different opinion than you do.
Synonyms for immature could also be: young, fresh, or enthusiastic. Synonyms for "more mature" in this case could also be: jaded, desensitized, bored, or tired. You're arguments (as are mine) are a matter of perspective and opinion whereas your claims about the US culture seem to be more of a value claim based on right or wrong (which one hopes would be argued from fact, statistics, or at least logic).
So please do explain to me why public nudity (in a sexual way) is absolutely wrong as opposed to different than the culture you opine to be superior. Please don't bring up breast feeding as that's a straw man argument. It's perfectly legal and accepted in US public locations (and in my personal experience the small minority who do have a problem will generally be run off by everyone else in the room if they voice an objection during a nursing).
Actually I believe that "Science Fiction" is considered a subset of "Fantastic Fiction." At least it used to be back when I found books by flipping through the cards by subject.
I sort of miss the card catalog, there were nice ways to find books with them that don't work the same as now. Of course I love some of the things you can do with a modern electronic library system too. Maybe it's just nostalgia for summers of library cards and fishing poles.
I can just imagine the reaction of my IT guy when I ask him to get management approval (who would require legal to review the open license) for "non standard" software just so that I can have convenient keyboard shortcuts while checking personal email at work...
You're grandfathered into their old plan. I'm kicking myself for not getting it a while ago. They're still pretty reasonable these days with $20 per three months basic connection and $0.20 per minute used, but that's not quite the same thing.
I haven't found any prepaid minutes that don't expire in my area. Or prepaid plans that continue if you don't pre-pay $x per month. Heck, I'd be willing to spend $0.20 to $0.50 per minute for a no contract non-expiring prepaid. I haven't looked too hard recently, but I did do a little searching when my wife was pregnant a while back.
I never mentioned anything about people who generally use cell phones. I'm sorry if it was taken otherwise. My "flame bait" footnote is actually only directed toward the subset of people who find it absolutely inconceivable that anyone could successfully manage one's life without a cell phone. I've been attacked by that type of person as if I had suggested something absurd such as not immunizing children. It was not my attempt (or in my text) to disparage the usefulness of cell phones. I had one for a while, but I got rid of it based on cost/usefulness for my lifestyle.
Flexibility in communication is valuable, but it does have a certain cost - typically $500 to $1000 a year (and a contract), although there are sometimes lower cost options for maybe $100 to $300 a year depending on what type of prepaid contract is offered in one's area.
Flexibility can also be built into plans. For example if my friend(s) are late to the restaurant I can go in so as to not lose our reservation. After say five to fifteen minutes I can ask to borrow the restaurant's phone to call the friend. If no answer I can decide (with the people with me if there are others) to order appetizers and wait longer, order the whole meal (possibly something for the missing friend), or tip the waiter and let someone waiting actually have the table so they can eat. It's possible that we all know where to go after dinner too. I have found that plans can break down with and without portable communication. There is also the fact that under-planned events (I'll meet you at the fair vs. I'll meet you by the long haired rabbits) can break down because someone forgets a phone, the battery dies, or the signal is wacky.
You also lose the middle range of spontaneity if you don't have a cell phone. If you are in the neighborhood you would have to find a pay phone first before being able to call a friend to drop in or meet at a local coffee shop. You can still go for the bigger option of ringing the doorbell (possibly already having acquired two coffees). Again - you can have that range back for about $500 to $1000 a year.
Managing life without a portable phone is perfectly reasonable for many people (not so reasonable for the traveling repairman). It can take a little more thorough planning and a little more flexibility if plans go wrong (contingencies - planned and spontaneous), security in one's ability to deal with problems that come up (hyperbole: walk in a straight line, living off the land, until you hit the ocean, then follow the coast until you hit a town with a phone), and enough confidence (in yourself and your relationships) that you don't feel the compulsion for instantly available communication. Having a cell phone doesn't mean you don't have any or all of the above routinely going for you, but people who don't believe that it's possible cope without a cell phone seem to do so out of a deficiency of one of the above.
Switched off cell phones still cost money. Stash an old cell phone and charger in the car for the 911 emergencies. Phone booths still exist, most stores (especially restaurants) have one they'll let a customer use, and (I live in a fairly populated area) not many strangers will refuse $5 for a 2 minute call on their phone. It's a cost/benefit and convenience thing - I just happen to fall on the minority side of the balance.
I think I was being productive, but looking back, I question that. Perhaps my abilities to 'multi-task' have diminished as I've aged, but I think that I've just become more adept at recognizing shoddy work. What about you all? Have you fond that as you get older, you need more quite time to think than you did when you were younger?
As you get older you (hopefully) realize the value of thinking all the way through before acting. Hence the phrase "older and wiser."
This is the very reason I don't have a cell phone* and haven't used an instant messenger in years. It is also the same reason that I only check personal email at most once a day (They call it mail for a reason). If I'm at home or the office than the land line works very well - if I'm not there than I'm busy anyway.
*People ask how can you manage that - I tell them it's a little secret called forethought or planning.
Slashdot Mirror
"Simultaneous raids are also said to have been carried out in The Netherlands, Belgium, Norway, Germany, Great Britain, the Czech Republic and Hungary."
Sweden (1904), Netherlands (1912), Belgium (1887), Norway (1896), Germany (1887), Great Britain (1887), Czech Republic (1993), and Hungary (1904) have all signed the Berne Convention among other agreements.
Sweden may have fairly loose laws when it comes to "sharing" protected work, but it also has international obligations that may seem more burdensome now than they did back in 1904.
I wonder if ACTA will have similar unforeseen consequences in one hundred years as today's act of file transmission and duplication was likely not considered back in the day of ink and presses.
What ever happened to the sad mac or the bomb mac?
And rule out ~1/6 of the current availability of human resources and future (and in some cases current) market potential? If the company is publicly traded, the stock holders may be able to make a good case about this being an illegal business decision because it's not in the company's best fiscal interest (The company would have to have a business case for why pulling out would cost them less than merely allowing a sovereign power access to data (presumably secure and having legal authority to do so - the fourth amendment is not a universal legal right (human right is another question))).
I think it's more of what is meant by priority traffic. If priority traffic happens to be users who pay more for a higher bandwidth cap then I don't see a problem - there's definitely an infrastructure cost if a user wants more than the standard line will deliver to their location (or the provider has to put in a bigger node so there isn't a pinch point). The entire issue seems to be an artifact of how we bill for internet usage. Billing entirely based on pipe size is absurd when the cost to the service is actually a function of total data sent and received.
How would you react if your electric company told you there was a flat rate on your 200 amp household service and that it was going to be more expensive just because your neighbor happens to like using his welder as a full spectrum light source every night (or you pay out for CF bulbs and he or she doesn't)? I'd even bet that some people would take to running a salamander in the back yard all summer just to "stick it to 'em." If you've ever needed more juice you may have to pay an initial fee for a 400 amp service (and maybe not) but after that it's pretty much based on what you use (some places might have a nominal recurring fee based on increased maintenance). Some industrial locations will pay a premium for guaranteed service (or guaranteed first back up service) but they may also get volume discounts - nobody seems to complain about that.
If we're talking about something other than neutral to the content of the traffic then it is not net neutrality. If we're talking about a provider making decisions and pricing based exclusively on quantity and rate of traffic than that should still be within the bounds of net neutrality.
Sure, I'd love to see a flat rate determined by a third party (government?) at a set percentage of profit of which another set percentage must go back into infrastructure improvement, but I am not convinced that such a system would work out the way I'd envision it's implementation and success.
In this case, the testimony of someone who wrote "a seven step guide Ardin published in January to 'legal revenge' that involves, in one example, sabotaging a victim's sexual relationships."
not that that makes Assange pure, holy, or free of any wrongdoing, but perhaps it should make one think...
Also, these numbers tend to only take into account operating efficiency. It's not really a true measure of the vehicle efficiency.
I'd also like to see product creation and lifetime taken into account if we're going to talk about the environmental impact of the vehicle. What's better: a Subaru gasoline vehicle made at a zero landfill facility but having mediocre mpg due to all wheel drive, or a Prius which has high mpg but will require a few battery replacements and disposals over it's lifetime? Speaking of lifetime, what's the average mileage when the vehicle hits the junk yard - buying vehicles which need replacement every 7 years instead of 10 has a big impact too.
Would you need the light source to be in front of the display (instead of back-lit) in such a case? Holograms function off of the grating or double-slit phenomena of interfering light. Also, would you be doing the separate red green blue laser illumination of modern color holograms or would we find a cheaper/safer/less complicated method of using a white light? Or would these be self illuminating pixels where there's a graphics driver calculating the light phase and interference patterns... Sorry... the pondering has gotten away from me, I think I'm going to stop now before I self nerd snipe.
Its stupid...a sort of Prudish Penal Code...
Having Charles I kick the Puritans asses out of England was probably a really good idea...
...our culture is just too young with regard to some moral aspects of society.
Certainly some things are...better developed over there [Europe], such a more adult attitude to nudity...
Those are the things I was seeing when I assumed you were saying the European views on nudity and sexuality are "superior" to the US views.
Perhaps I am at fault for not reading your articulated phrases clearly enough. Please help me understand how the above are neutral statements and have no connotation implying the "superiority" of one view over the other.
With an active display you can use software to account for parallax for a single user (or multiple users with very similar points of view).
It's been done already with webcams and video conferencing, computer monitors, and even a fake office window (using a wiimote I think - I couldn't find the video where I thought it was though. It showed San Francisco in the distance though - maybe someone else remembers where it is).
You're right about multiple viewers being a pretty trick.
Every layer of polarization cuts the available light in half. Creating a display with pixels smaller than the unaided eye can view without these is actually huge because the current limit in preventing a "realistic" display (i.e. you can't tell the difference between the display and looking out a window) is actually in the contrast resolution (difference between light and dark) which still has a very long way to go before it hits human eye capacity. Freeing up more light allows for brighter whites and perhaps even the possibility of layering displays to get darker blacks (depending on the transparency of "black.")
Yes the American and English cultures diverged a few hundred years back. Which means we're different not inferior. If we seem more violent then perhaps there's a reason behind the desensitization toward distant and/or fictional occurrences such as the far more personal association we have when we still to this day need to worry about our children being eaten by the wildlife on their way to school.
Perhaps instead of condemning the US culture it may be worth asking "why?" do the US and Europe have different views on sexuality and nudity. And before you call the US position of viewing sexuality as a more private aspect than Europeans view it "wrong," you may wish to ask "does it cause unjust harm?" (Such as withholding suffrage, property inheritance, educational, or human rights). Cultural judgments are a tricky thing and obviously a majority (because we are a republic) of the culture here has a different opinion than you do.
Synonyms for immature could also be: young, fresh, or enthusiastic. Synonyms for "more mature" in this case could also be: jaded, desensitized, bored, or tired. You're arguments (as are mine) are a matter of perspective and opinion whereas your claims about the US culture seem to be more of a value claim based on right or wrong (which one hopes would be argued from fact, statistics, or at least logic).
So please do explain to me why public nudity (in a sexual way) is absolutely wrong as opposed to different than the culture you opine to be superior. Please don't bring up breast feeding as that's a straw man argument. It's perfectly legal and accepted in US public locations (and in my personal experience the small minority who do have a problem will generally be run off by everyone else in the room if they voice an objection during a nursing).
Truth is a legal defense in the US, I'm not sure if it is in the UK.
Perhaps filtering at the border is something to be concerned about in some jurisdictions.
Actually I believe that "Science Fiction" is considered a subset of "Fantastic Fiction." At least it used to be back when I found books by flipping through the cards by subject.
I sort of miss the card catalog, there were nice ways to find books with them that don't work the same as now. Of course I love some of the things you can do with a modern electronic library system too. Maybe it's just nostalgia for summers of library cards and fishing poles.
Portability.
I can just imagine the reaction of my IT guy when I ask him to get management approval (who would require legal to review the open license) for "non standard" software just so that I can have convenient keyboard shortcuts while checking personal email at work...
You're grandfathered into their old plan. I'm kicking myself for not getting it a while ago. They're still pretty reasonable these days with $20 per three months basic connection and $0.20 per minute used, but that's not quite the same thing.
I've got "Nazi" - it's a sure win on the internet, but sometimes it takes a while.
Keeping more than one version of anything requires effort and more people...
It doesn't mean that I still don't mourn the keyboard commands in Pine
I haven't found any prepaid minutes that don't expire in my area. Or prepaid plans that continue if you don't pre-pay $x per month. Heck, I'd be willing to spend $0.20 to $0.50 per minute for a no contract non-expiring prepaid. I haven't looked too hard recently, but I did do a little searching when my wife was pregnant a while back.
I never mentioned anything about people who generally use cell phones. I'm sorry if it was taken otherwise. My "flame bait" footnote is actually only directed toward the subset of people who find it absolutely inconceivable that anyone could successfully manage one's life without a cell phone. I've been attacked by that type of person as if I had suggested something absurd such as not immunizing children. It was not my attempt (or in my text) to disparage the usefulness of cell phones. I had one for a while, but I got rid of it based on cost/usefulness for my lifestyle.
Flexibility in communication is valuable, but it does have a certain cost - typically $500 to $1000 a year (and a contract), although there are sometimes lower cost options for maybe $100 to $300 a year depending on what type of prepaid contract is offered in one's area.
Flexibility can also be built into plans. For example if my friend(s) are late to the restaurant I can go in so as to not lose our reservation. After say five to fifteen minutes I can ask to borrow the restaurant's phone to call the friend. If no answer I can decide (with the people with me if there are others) to order appetizers and wait longer, order the whole meal (possibly something for the missing friend), or tip the waiter and let someone waiting actually have the table so they can eat. It's possible that we all know where to go after dinner too. I have found that plans can break down with and without portable communication. There is also the fact that under-planned events (I'll meet you at the fair vs. I'll meet you by the long haired rabbits) can break down because someone forgets a phone, the battery dies, or the signal is wacky.
You also lose the middle range of spontaneity if you don't have a cell phone. If you are in the neighborhood you would have to find a pay phone first before being able to call a friend to drop in or meet at a local coffee shop. You can still go for the bigger option of ringing the doorbell (possibly already having acquired two coffees). Again - you can have that range back for about $500 to $1000 a year.
Managing life without a portable phone is perfectly reasonable for many people (not so reasonable for the traveling repairman). It can take a little more thorough planning and a little more flexibility if plans go wrong (contingencies - planned and spontaneous), security in one's ability to deal with problems that come up (hyperbole: walk in a straight line, living off the land, until you hit the ocean, then follow the coast until you hit a town with a phone), and enough confidence (in yourself and your relationships) that you don't feel the compulsion for instantly available communication. Having a cell phone doesn't mean you don't have any or all of the above routinely going for you, but people who don't believe that it's possible cope without a cell phone seem to do so out of a deficiency of one of the above.
Switched off cell phones still cost money. Stash an old cell phone and charger in the car for the 911 emergencies. Phone booths still exist, most stores (especially restaurants) have one they'll let a customer use, and (I live in a fairly populated area) not many strangers will refuse $5 for a 2 minute call on their phone. It's a cost/benefit and convenience thing - I just happen to fall on the minority side of the balance.
Well, and Barbie for the girl friends. How do you know my system so well?
I think I was being productive, but looking back, I question that. Perhaps my abilities to 'multi-task' have diminished as I've aged, but I think that I've just become more adept at recognizing shoddy work. What about you all? Have you fond that as you get older, you need more quite time to think than you did when you were younger?
As you get older you (hopefully) realize the value of thinking all the way through before acting. Hence the phrase "older and wiser."
Nah - it's real friends. They care enough to be reliable, know the contingencies, and not be offended if something crazy happens.
This is the very reason I don't have a cell phone* and haven't used an instant messenger in years. It is also the same reason that I only check personal email at most once a day (They call it mail for a reason). If I'm at home or the office than the land line works very well - if I'm not there than I'm busy anyway.
*People ask how can you manage that - I tell them it's a little secret called forethought or planning.