Calling it a caveat is putting it lightly given what the wording of the fifth actually is:
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."
By the fifth I assume you mean the right to remain silent. You have this right to not incriminate yourself, it does not prevent you from having to testify specific information about something when the court has subpoena you.
Speaking of grand juries and the Fifth Amendment: No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."
This is why I often maintain there is really very little difference between the two parties...
You and I are the same. We both type words into the internet. So we must be the same in every possible way? Political parties remain political parties. Ruling governments remain ruling governments. Just because they share a common "enemy" and someone specifically doing something to you are trying to prevent makes them your enemy doesn't mean there is "little difference between the two parties".
As Wikileaks has said on Twitter, this is simply an effort to coerce Manning to testify. I think it's sad they can get away with this.
It's not even hypocritical. US tech firms face an industrial espionage, not a foreign state attacking state secrets. In that regard when the person doing spying is the US government or another US entity there is actual legal recourse which limits commercial damage.
The same cannot be said for Chinese industrial espionage where good luck suing a Chinese company about stolen IP.
For all you care we should make a company which could unilaterally enact the very thing you hate? There's some dumb logic in these comments but you have definitely came out on top.
Seriously, that's her plan "break up the monopolies"... and give the market to the Chinese
Your logical fallacy is: Non Sequitur
Breaking up a monopoly has zero to do with giving the market to a foreign country. What you do to regulate a foreign entity and it's impact on your citizens is completely independent on how you deal with local ones.
Now please wipe the froth off your mouth and go take a basic economics course.
So while Apple is doing well, it's doing well in a market with healthy competition.
The problem with being big does not extend to monopolies in the retail market. Apple has significant sway over a wide variety of industries. Their market size is enough to convince competitors to deprioritise their own device in the name of winning manufacturing contracts (Samsung), their volume of premium devices has the ability to both lift up as well as insta-bankrupt companies in its supplychain. Their efforts affect consumers through well funded lobbying efforts. We can thank them for being benevolent but their influence on the consumer market could just as happily have done a Blackberry when it comes to supporting foreign and local governments exerting control over citizens. Their size and clout make them a driving force in the banking industry where in the USA companies are left with no option but to play along, and their while they have competition, they have incredible market power due to single device and model shipments being an absolute dominant force in the mobile industry, big enough that they dictate terms to service providers rather than the other way around.
Apple is friendly to consumers.... Google was too at some point. But in general relying on their goodwill to keep you safe is not the smartest move.
Errr no. You ignore your history and ignore all alternatives that very much meet your definition which were none the less failures and utterly ignored, not the least of which is Edge, which actually is small and light weight, and yet is rightfully relegated to the dustbin of history.
Internet Explorer was never about being small and light weight. It only ever took off because it was bundled default and had the name internet in it at a time when the word internet was not understood.
Firefox was never about being small and light weight, it was about being able to render websites faster and in a standard compliant way. Even in the early days it wasn't appreciably smaller or lighter weight than internet explorer 6, and pretty much always actually appeared slower thanks to Windows preloading much of IE's underlying junk.
Chrome hit the scene about the same weight as all of its competitors albeit with a Javascript engine without comparison. It was always a heavy beast, but quite critically the actual internet appeared to work faster, and it only seemed to increase in popularity with the endless cruft which was added in successive releases.
In the meantime actual small and light weight browsers are thoroughly ignored, and why wouldn't they be? We have idle cores and empty RAM. We're in a world of low latency disc access. Being small and light just isn't relevant on a modern desktop, and being able to launch 75ms faster than a competitor just isn't an issue.
You claim that browsers are idly adding "would be nice" features. The reality is that most are just adhering to web standards we expect our operating systems to interact with. Did I say operating systems? I meant brow... no actually calling them operating systems is almost more correct these days.
When your language is no longer being taught in schools, well, that's the beginning of the end.
Define no longer being taught. Everything you said was right so far as Java is no longer a suitable option for Introduction to Object Oriented Programming. That doesn't mean it's no longer being taught, it means it's not longer being taught to first year students.
I just checked my old university. I learnt Java (involuntarily, I'm not a software engineer) in CS1001 which is a first year first semester subject in any computer related degree and an elective in other degrees. That course has moved to CO2001 (second year first semester subject), and all other Java subjects still very much being taught in the CO7 and CS7 series which means they are specific 3rd / 4th year courses depending on which major you take.
It's still very much being taught it's just not longer a good language to teach basic concepts.
Not caring, is still voluntary. In the world of the internet, and of common news articles talking about alternatives, not knowing is still voluntary. If you were forced into the upgrade way back when, and you're still using it now, you're doing so voluntarily.
I know it blows the minds of Slashdot users, but these days 100% of Windows 10 installs are voluntary (well except for the windows 10 machine I was given at work, I don't have any option but to use that if I want to continue to get paid).
As for the lies option. I don't doubt the figures. There's a lot of computers out there in the world. Very VERY few run something other than Windows. You're acting on the gut feeling of a typical anti-Microsoft Slashdotter too focused on ideology to be concerned with actually looking around you.
Factually incorrect as every Win10 box comes with a decent AV installed and running by default
Every Windows 7 box post Service Pack 1 has the same default settings for AV as Windows 10. It will monitor that an AV solution is installed. It will default to an enabled windows defender if no other option is running on the system, and it will alert you, annoy you and bug you unless you specifically disable that alert if no AV solution is present. Completely identical to Windows 10.
If a cashier has trouble counting change, that person needs to find a different job.
-retailer for 17 years
It's not the cashier that is slow. It's me, going to pay $1 for a Marsbar. Only to be told that it's actually $1.27 and having to get additional crap out of my wallet again, having to wait (admittedly a short period of time) for some change, and then walking around with a pocket full of shrapnel which me as a non-cashier will then battle with trying to get rid of when the next Marsbar craving kicks in.
Every other country in the world the sticker price is the price. I can count my change while waiting in line. In many sane countries lower value shrapnel is abolished. These days I flat out refuse 1c and 2c pieces from German retailers as change. I can't use them as tender in my country. Yet the cashiers in Germany are a mixture of both confused and worried, not quite sure how to handle the situation.
I actually had one person tell me I have to take it since the till won't add up causing big troubles at the end of the day and she could be fired for stealing if I refused to take it and she pocketed it. She was speechless when I took the change and threw it in the bin next to her and walked out.
Banks can also be surprisingly selective about who they allow to open accounts
That is an American problem, and speaks to this law here. The justification for the law as cashless being a burden on the poor is solid. But rather than fix the problem through regulation of banking they just force retailers to accommodate a system perpetuated by banks and credit agencies.
In many countries being homeless or poor does not disqualify you from any cashless options.
I think it's a good point too but the solution to the problem is completely stupid. How about tearing down the barriers that affect the poor rather than introducing laws that embed inefficient ways of operating. Why in 2019 does it cost you money, or why is anyone denied from a cashless opportunity? I've had a debit card since I was 8 years old and have been able to pay cashless without any fees. I've had a VISA Debit / Debit Mastercard which allowed me to use debit for credit transactions since I was 15, again without any additional fees.
A restaurant cannot force you to cover someone else's order
They wouldn't have forced you to cover someone else's order, restaurants work by table. It's nice for you to think that you have some legal right here, but you don't. Consider yourself lucky that the restaurant just thought it easier to split the bill rather than deal with having to file police reports against a bunch of arrogant customers.
Sidenote, it's 20fucking19. There's a mountain of technological options available that make sorting our your bill afterwards easier and faster than having the restaurant split the bill in the first place. Hell even my bank has an app that takes care of tracking who has paid, who hasn't, sends them reminders over whatsapp, etc.
they also can't say you have a debt with them and are going to refuse your legal tender.
And that's been covered many times before. Did both parties sign a legal lending document? No? You don't have debt with them. You're just a customer who has taken something and not yet paid. That's not "debt" in any legal sense or financial sense, and just looking up the word in the dictionary doesn't help your case either.
Meanwhile, existing Tesla hardware is already capable of utilising the higher charge rate after a simple software update. That’s pretty impressive.
As nice as it is this isn't some incredible promised foresight. No one bought a Tesla with the idea that sometime in the future it may charge faster. People have range anxiety and are concerned about getting to their destination, not whether they will need to spend 8 or 10 minutes at the supercharger.
Sounds like they are playing catch-up to Tesla, not the other way around.
Look as good as Tesla is, leave the fanboyism to where it's deserved on their fantastic cars. Tesla's first superchargers were faster than the competition exclusively outside urban centres. At the time when Tesla was still rolling out 75kW urban superchargers and 130kW split superchargers the european consortium were already working on the 350kW superchargers. Their competitors were the first to put out a charger with that capacity, the first to get actual distribution of those chargers started, and the first to have cars charge at that speed. Claiming that is "catchup" is disingenuous.
Tesla is a great company with many great achievements and you should focus on those rather than masturbating all over your keyboard.
110 can kill you but with high probability you will survive because you are below the let-go-point for normal human skin resistance and shoes.
No. 110V DC is below the let go point. 110V AC will mess you up just as readily as 230V AC if you're unlucky enough to get the power through your heart or brain, and neither will cause serious long term muscle damage, though 230V put you at an increased likelyhood of post electrocution blood clots complications.
I do however know a comical (and probably not relevant but comical comparison anyway) comparison between electrocution at 230V and 110V. We have electricians at our work from various parts of the world, 2 of them have come in contact arm to shoulder while working. Both punched themselves in the face. The guy working on our site in Europe broke his nose, the guy from the USA just had a nose bleed:-)
It's the transition point between air gap jumping plasma arcs that are self sustaining st elmos' fire death and spakes that just damp out.
It is nothing of the sort. The ability to sustain an arc depends on the characteristics of the airgap in relation to voltage and current. Previously ionised air (spark) can easily be sustained with 110V and 20A. It's the reason you guys have Arc Fault Current Interrupters in your houses.
Now as to why your houses burn down so often that you typically install AFCI in residential buildings, well that's quite bewildering. I've not seen one in a country which uses 230V systems.
Likewise 20 amps is where things like small resistances in connections start to just matter but can usually be managed.
Take a zero off the end and you'd be right. 20A is well and truly in the burn your house down if there's a resistance somewhere category. The rest of the world isn't better at this, 10A will also quite happily start a large fire.
Save the environment by running twice as many fuel burning trucks to pick it up... Every bill increase is blamed on 'increased recycling costs'... The whole thing is a mess and a boondoggle.
Implying that your first truck is less than half full when it gets back to the depot? Please apply some thought into your post.
We used to carefully sort and fill multiple recycling containers with paper, glass, metal, etc. But then they wanted to have only one pickup container, and call it single-stream. So now we're supposed to throw everything in there together. What did they expect?
Single stream recycling isn't the problem. It's contamination in whatever recycling stream you have that is the problem. e.g. Cardboard goes in the recycling bin. That half eaten pizza inside that cardboard does not.
Slashdot Mirror
Thanks for the correction, you are of course right I completely forgot that Mozilla came in between in the popular browser development.
No, that's not true. There are some caveats
Calling it a caveat is putting it lightly given what the wording of the fifth actually is:
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."
That means she can't take the fifth
By the fifth I assume you mean the right to remain silent. You have this right to not incriminate yourself, it does not prevent you from having to testify specific information about something when the court has subpoena you.
Speaking of grand juries and the Fifth Amendment:
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."
Bigoted transophobe.
Hey, he hasn't changed his name to Womanning yet.
This is why I often maintain there is really very little difference between the two parties...
You and I are the same. We both type words into the internet. So we must be the same in every possible way? Political parties remain political parties. Ruling governments remain ruling governments. Just because they share a common "enemy" and someone specifically doing something to you are trying to prevent makes them your enemy doesn't mean there is "little difference between the two parties".
As Wikileaks has said on Twitter, this is simply an effort to coerce Manning to testify. I think it's sad they can get away with this.
Well ... yeah. Of course it is.
It's not even hypocritical. US tech firms face an industrial espionage, not a foreign state attacking state secrets. In that regard when the person doing spying is the US government or another US entity there is actual legal recourse which limits commercial damage.
The same cannot be said for Chinese industrial espionage where good luck suing a Chinese company about stolen IP.
For all you care we should make a company which could unilaterally enact the very thing you hate? There's some dumb logic in these comments but you have definitely came out on top.
Seriously, that's her plan "break up the monopolies" ... and give the market to the Chinese
Your logical fallacy is: Non Sequitur
Breaking up a monopoly has zero to do with giving the market to a foreign country. What you do to regulate a foreign entity and it's impact on your citizens is completely independent on how you deal with local ones.
Now please wipe the froth off your mouth and go take a basic economics course.
So while Apple is doing well, it's doing well in a market with healthy competition.
The problem with being big does not extend to monopolies in the retail market. Apple has significant sway over a wide variety of industries. Their market size is enough to convince competitors to deprioritise their own device in the name of winning manufacturing contracts (Samsung), their volume of premium devices has the ability to both lift up as well as insta-bankrupt companies in its supplychain. Their efforts affect consumers through well funded lobbying efforts. We can thank them for being benevolent but their influence on the consumer market could just as happily have done a Blackberry when it comes to supporting foreign and local governments exerting control over citizens. Their size and clout make them a driving force in the banking industry where in the USA companies are left with no option but to play along, and their while they have competition, they have incredible market power due to single device and model shipments being an absolute dominant force in the mobile industry, big enough that they dictate terms to service providers rather than the other way around.
Apple is friendly to consumers. ... Google was too at some point. But in general relying on their goodwill to keep you safe is not the smartest move.
Errr no. You ignore your history and ignore all alternatives that very much meet your definition which were none the less failures and utterly ignored, not the least of which is Edge, which actually is small and light weight, and yet is rightfully relegated to the dustbin of history.
Internet Explorer was never about being small and light weight. It only ever took off because it was bundled default and had the name internet in it at a time when the word internet was not understood.
Firefox was never about being small and light weight, it was about being able to render websites faster and in a standard compliant way. Even in the early days it wasn't appreciably smaller or lighter weight than internet explorer 6, and pretty much always actually appeared slower thanks to Windows preloading much of IE's underlying junk.
Chrome hit the scene about the same weight as all of its competitors albeit with a Javascript engine without comparison. It was always a heavy beast, but quite critically the actual internet appeared to work faster, and it only seemed to increase in popularity with the endless cruft which was added in successive releases.
In the meantime actual small and light weight browsers are thoroughly ignored, and why wouldn't they be? We have idle cores and empty RAM. We're in a world of low latency disc access. Being small and light just isn't relevant on a modern desktop, and being able to launch 75ms faster than a competitor just isn't an issue.
You claim that browsers are idly adding "would be nice" features. The reality is that most are just adhering to web standards we expect our operating systems to interact with. Did I say operating systems? I meant brow... no actually calling them operating systems is almost more correct these days.
When your language is no longer being taught in schools, well, that's the beginning of the end.
Define no longer being taught. Everything you said was right so far as Java is no longer a suitable option for Introduction to Object Oriented Programming. That doesn't mean it's no longer being taught, it means it's not longer being taught to first year students.
I just checked my old university. I learnt Java (involuntarily, I'm not a software engineer) in CS1001 which is a first year first semester subject in any computer related degree and an elective in other degrees. That course has moved to CO2001 (second year first semester subject), and all other Java subjects still very much being taught in the CO7 and CS7 series which means they are specific 3rd / 4th year courses depending on which major you take.
It's still very much being taught it's just not longer a good language to teach basic concepts.
Not caring, is still voluntary.
In the world of the internet, and of common news articles talking about alternatives, not knowing is still voluntary.
If you were forced into the upgrade way back when, and you're still using it now, you're doing so voluntarily.
I know it blows the minds of Slashdot users, but these days 100% of Windows 10 installs are voluntary (well except for the windows 10 machine I was given at work, I don't have any option but to use that if I want to continue to get paid).
As for the lies option. I don't doubt the figures. There's a lot of computers out there in the world. Very VERY few run something other than Windows. You're acting on the gut feeling of a typical anti-Microsoft Slashdotter too focused on ideology to be concerned with actually looking around you.
Both Vulcan and mobile gaming will pretty much ensure Linux gaming in a few years.
I like your optimism. 2020 will surely be the year of Linux on Desktop.
Factually incorrect as every Win10 box comes with a decent AV installed and running by default
Every Windows 7 box post Service Pack 1 has the same default settings for AV as Windows 10. It will monitor that an AV solution is installed. It will default to an enabled windows defender if no other option is running on the system, and it will alert you, annoy you and bug you unless you specifically disable that alert if no AV solution is present. Completely identical to Windows 10.
If a cashier has trouble counting change, that person needs to find a different job.
-retailer for 17 years
It's not the cashier that is slow. It's me, going to pay $1 for a Marsbar. Only to be told that it's actually $1.27 and having to get additional crap out of my wallet again, having to wait (admittedly a short period of time) for some change, and then walking around with a pocket full of shrapnel which me as a non-cashier will then battle with trying to get rid of when the next Marsbar craving kicks in.
Every other country in the world the sticker price is the price. I can count my change while waiting in line. In many sane countries lower value shrapnel is abolished. These days I flat out refuse 1c and 2c pieces from German retailers as change. I can't use them as tender in my country. Yet the cashiers in Germany are a mixture of both confused and worried, not quite sure how to handle the situation.
I actually had one person tell me I have to take it since the till won't add up causing big troubles at the end of the day and she could be fired for stealing if I refused to take it and she pocketed it. She was speechless when I took the change and threw it in the bin next to her and walked out.
Banks can also be surprisingly selective about who they allow to open accounts
That is an American problem, and speaks to this law here. The justification for the law as cashless being a burden on the poor is solid. But rather than fix the problem through regulation of banking they just force retailers to accommodate a system perpetuated by banks and credit agencies.
In many countries being homeless or poor does not disqualify you from any cashless options.
I think it's a good point too but the solution to the problem is completely stupid. How about tearing down the barriers that affect the poor rather than introducing laws that embed inefficient ways of operating. Why in 2019 does it cost you money, or why is anyone denied from a cashless opportunity? I've had a debit card since I was 8 years old and have been able to pay cashless without any fees. I've had a VISA Debit / Debit Mastercard which allowed me to use debit for credit transactions since I was 15, again without any additional fees.
Why is this so expensive to do in America?
A restaurant cannot force you to cover someone else's order
They wouldn't have forced you to cover someone else's order, restaurants work by table. It's nice for you to think that you have some legal right here, but you don't. Consider yourself lucky that the restaurant just thought it easier to split the bill rather than deal with having to file police reports against a bunch of arrogant customers.
Sidenote, it's 20fucking19. There's a mountain of technological options available that make sorting our your bill afterwards easier and faster than having the restaurant split the bill in the first place. Hell even my bank has an app that takes care of tracking who has paid, who hasn't, sends them reminders over whatsapp, etc.
they also can't say you have a debt with them and are going to refuse your legal tender.
And that's been covered many times before. Did both parties sign a legal lending document? No? You don't have debt with them. You're just a customer who has taken something and not yet paid. That's not "debt" in any legal sense or financial sense, and just looking up the word in the dictionary doesn't help your case either.
Meanwhile, existing Tesla hardware is already capable of utilising the higher charge rate after a simple software update. That’s pretty impressive.
As nice as it is this isn't some incredible promised foresight. No one bought a Tesla with the idea that sometime in the future it may charge faster. People have range anxiety and are concerned about getting to their destination, not whether they will need to spend 8 or 10 minutes at the supercharger.
Sounds like they are playing catch-up to Tesla, not the other way around.
Look as good as Tesla is, leave the fanboyism to where it's deserved on their fantastic cars. Tesla's first superchargers were faster than the competition exclusively outside urban centres. At the time when Tesla was still rolling out 75kW urban superchargers and 130kW split superchargers the european consortium were already working on the 350kW superchargers. Their competitors were the first to put out a charger with that capacity, the first to get actual distribution of those chargers started, and the first to have cars charge at that speed. Claiming that is "catchup" is disingenuous.
Tesla is a great company with many great achievements and you should focus on those rather than masturbating all over your keyboard.
110 can kill you but with high probability you will survive because you are below the let-go-point for normal human skin resistance and shoes.
No. 110V DC is below the let go point. 110V AC will mess you up just as readily as 230V AC if you're unlucky enough to get the power through your heart or brain, and neither will cause serious long term muscle damage, though 230V put you at an increased likelyhood of post electrocution blood clots complications.
I do however know a comical (and probably not relevant but comical comparison anyway) comparison between electrocution at 230V and 110V. We have electricians at our work from various parts of the world, 2 of them have come in contact arm to shoulder while working. Both punched themselves in the face. The guy working on our site in Europe broke his nose, the guy from the USA just had a nose bleed :-)
It's the transition point between air gap jumping plasma arcs that are self sustaining st elmos' fire death and spakes that just damp out.
It is nothing of the sort. The ability to sustain an arc depends on the characteristics of the airgap in relation to voltage and current. Previously ionised air (spark) can easily be sustained with 110V and 20A. It's the reason you guys have Arc Fault Current Interrupters in your houses.
Now as to why your houses burn down so often that you typically install AFCI in residential buildings, well that's quite bewildering. I've not seen one in a country which uses 230V systems.
Likewise 20 amps is where things like small resistances in connections start to just matter but can usually be managed.
Take a zero off the end and you'd be right. 20A is well and truly in the burn your house down if there's a resistance somewhere category. The rest of the world isn't better at this, 10A will also quite happily start a large fire.
And is it less than half full both trips? Or do you prefer to put two trucks out at the same time because {insert arbitrary silly reason here}
Save the environment by running twice as many fuel burning trucks to pick it up... Every bill increase is blamed on 'increased recycling costs'... The whole thing is a mess and a boondoggle.
Implying that your first truck is less than half full when it gets back to the depot? Please apply some thought into your post.
We used to carefully sort and fill multiple recycling containers with paper, glass, metal, etc. But then they wanted to have only one pickup container, and call it single-stream. So now we're supposed to throw everything in there together. What did they expect?
Single stream recycling isn't the problem. It's contamination in whatever recycling stream you have that is the problem. e.g. Cardboard goes in the recycling bin. That half eaten pizza inside that cardboard does not.
Yes, please get this straight because right now you're completely bent out of shape over something completely wrong.
Try RTFA.