well, if the detector is the size of a penny, then yes probably pretty rare to detect cosmic rays... but if the detector is the size of a pc case, it will get hits every few seconds. So what? It doesn't matter if a ray hits the case, it only matters if hits a vulnerable part of a memory chip. The target is a lot closer to the size of a penny than the size of a case.
This would mean my PC case is perforated by cosmic rays several times each minute. That's not rare. But who cares if a ray hits your power supply? It's got to hit the right piece of silicon on the memory chip. The target is many orders of magnitude smaller in volume than the case.
Each of those files is protected by copyright. The Olympics version has copied 100% of icecube, 100% of cloud, 100% of splash sound, etc. That's not fair use.
You are right, having the same rules is not a copyright infringement in itself. But in this case it's evidence that they copied the code of the original game verbatim and that is copyright infringement.
"Scrabulous" is fairly clearly too similar to Scrabble for trademark law. Is it? If it was "Scapple" or "Scabblo", sure. But I don't see "Scrabulous" infringing just because it shares the same first 5 letters. The two words don't look or sound particularly similar. Or are you saying that every computer company with a name starting with "Micro" is infringing Microsoft's trademark?
If this star shoots out a gamma ray WMD directly at the Earth RIGHT NOW - won't it take at least 8000years to get here? Nothing travels faster than the speed of light, yes? But it might have happened 7999.9 years ago and we've got no way of knowing until the gamma rays get here.
Naming a game "Scrabulous" obviously (court to decide) builds from the name Scrabble. They might be confusingly similar. I don't find them to be, but as you say, a court would need to decide.
Would Scrabulous be as popular if it wasn't instantly recognizable? Probably not. I don't agree. Particularly on Facebook popularity is a viral thing and the name has very little to do with it as people are not searching for these games by name. They are finding them because their friends have found them.
How exactly is Scrabulous in "flagrant violation of copyright law"? Did they copy the text of the rules wholesale? Did they use the Scrabble trademark? Scrabulous may be a blatant rip-off of Scrabble, but it's not at all clear that it violates any of Mattel's intellectual property.
The RIAA is collecting damages on the basis that the artists have suffered financial harm due to the defendants actions. The rewards are intended by the courts to compensate the artists for the damage done. The RIAA have a moral (and probably legal) obligation to distribute the money they collect to the artists.
If you don't have old kit lying around two things come to mind, go ahead and use your Wii like that and what the hell kind of/.'r are you? I kid, I kid...:) As it happens I do already have a MythTV box so this Wii hack isn't something I need. But the OP I first replied to seemed to be of the opinion that this hack is worthless to everyone. That's clearly not true. There will be people who don't want to build a separate box (due to cost, or because they only want one box by the TV, or who simply don't need the extra functionality a dedicated box could provide), but who would be happy to use their Wii this way.
But if you do have old kit, such as I do, enough to build 3-4 computers. Then it makes much more sense to build a dedicated media center or linux box out of that. The point is that even if someone has all the parts on hand (and I doubt many people have a case as nice as the Wii's just lying around), they still might not want yet another separate box sitting by the TV. Some people prefer convergence, even if it costs them functionality.
because its easier to slap together old kit? lol No, it's not. I don't have a MicroATX board or case sitting around. I have a Wii. All I have to do with the Wii is setup the software. That might be more difficult than setting up the software on some homebrew system, but with the homebrew system I'll have to research, purchase, and assemble the components. Why would I want to do that and add another box to the pile beside the TV if the Wii will do the same job?
A properly configured microatx board destined for recycling would do all that and more with a few addins and a nice case. Yes, but I already have a Wii. Why the hell would I want to add another box if the Wii would serve?
Think about it. It is pretty clear what he's suggesting. Nina is apparently not only a doctor, but also may be into BDSM. On top of that, she ALSO has motive for an attack on Reiser. In divorce, motive doesn't generally incline in one direction only. So, a physician, presumptively capable of blood draws, and not afraid of personal pain, disappears and - WOW - blood is found in her ex's garage and car. Ok, so why does she have to be a doctor to spread a little blood around? I still don't see either her profession or the possibility of her being in BDSM as increasing the probability that she framed Hans.
Could be murder, could be a frame. This is admittedly more complicated than the stupid criminal hypothesis, which assumes that the simplest idea the police come up with is the best, and generally is. However, merely because it is simplest, doesn't make it the correct one. Both hypotheses can account for all the case's facts. I don't think Hans has explained the missing seat yet, has he? The Nina-framed-Hans hypothesis is going to start looking pretty far-fetched if it includes her removing the seat.
That is often the problem with circumstantial evidence, the circumstance is the fact, everything else is supposition and speculation. Nina could be back in Russia and it is unlikely that anyone here would ever know. What I find interesting is the change in tone of the Slashdot discussions. Initially the "he's innocent" proponents basically maintained that she'd gone back to Russia. That seemed pretty plausible on the face of it, though it would be odd for her to have done so secretly and without the kids. Now there is a fair bit of circumstantial evidence against Hans that doesn't really fit that hypothesis so people have started expanding the defense to include her framing him.
this is one case where i would expect it to warrant further investigation as A) Nina Reiser was a physician You've made this statement a couple of times. Why? I don't see the relevance.
It's peak processing power of 504 teraflops will be shared among over 500 researchers working across the even larger TeraGrid system. Although its expected lifespan is just four years... What I don't understand is how the editor could it wrong and then in very next sentence get it right. Do the Slashdot editors just toss a coin to see if they should use an apostrophe?
It always amused me how the popular analogy from the other camp was "Oh, so if you want a car, it's okay to steal it is it?" So they can get all high and moral. But when you break it down and say "Okay, I'm going to make an exact duplicate of your car, never once depriving you of the usage of it. It will not inconvenience you in any way." The argument rather falls flat on it's face. One of the very goods point TFA makes is that this argument from the industry associations is not helping them because it's so clearly false. It really is a sophism, and by persisting with it they are effectively saying that either they think we are idiots or they are idiots. Either way the argument ultimately hurts their position.
But for most users, why bother converting? Just keep watching it on your current player. Some people don't want to have both an HD-DVD and a Blu-ray player in their home theatre systems.
Why do you feel it's necessary for the government to mandate seatbelt usage? If people want to behave stupidly and weed themselves out of the gene pool, why should society object? Because of the costs to society when those people don't die. The costs of health care for those people are passed on to the public either via insurance premiums or taxes.
I wouldn't have use for a TV above 32 inches or so on the high end, it wouldn't be practical for the space I have. The SMPTE recommend a minimum horizontal field of view of 30 degrees for home theatre installations. With a 32" widescreen TV that means they recommend you sit no further away than 4.3 feet. THX installations specify a minimum of 26 degrees (5ft viewing distance) and recommend 36 degrees (3.6 ft). Personally I think those recommendations are uncomfortably close, but even so you may be underestimating how large a TV you can get away with. Just how small is this room of yours?
Yeah right... The fact that it's a two-year old, highly-classified spy satellite has nothing to do with it. The *real* reason that they're spending $60M is to make sure that some fuel doesn't contaminate an acre or so of land. Nothing useful in terms of spy gear is going to make it through re-entry. What might make it through re-entry is a large, resilient fuel tank containing high-toxic, probably carcinogenic, fuel. Logic dictates that if there was really something classified on the satellite that they didn't want to survive re-entry they simply would have designed it to not survive re-entry or they would have installed a self-destruct. Shooting it down at this point for the reason you're implying doesn't make sense.
Besides, if it's the gear (rather than the fuel) that concerns them then why haven't they bothered shooting down other de-orbiting sats in the past?
They're not shooting at it to make it de-orbit, it's already de-orbiting. They are shooting at it to make sure that the hydrazine fuel tank doesn't make it down to Earth intact (or worse, almost intact).
In the other case you have connections to multiple destinations
Many download managers are able to find mirrors for the downloaded file, thus multiple connections to other sites are open. Still generally a lot fewer connections than BT. Remember the point of this thread is that BT traffic supposedly looks like (or can be made to look like) FTP traffic. A usage profile where FTP traffic might look a bit like BT traffic doesn't prove that BT traffic looks like FTP traffic.
Traffic during a download will be in one direction only.
Can't say anything for this one; except the fact that sometimes I happen to be the only leecher, so traffic is also one-way only (if we discard the overhead transfers). We can't ignore the overhead transfers though. They're part of the traffic analysis and one of the main features that makes BT traffic look different to FTP traffic.
I don't necessarily know what I'm talking about, but wouldn't a single P2P download look similar to a ton of small FTP downloads and uploads to and from various locations? That case would certainly look a lot more similar, at least for passive FTP. But it's a very unusual usage profile for FTP.
I agree that normal browsing and P2P are going to look obviously different so hiding P2P within HTTP is not going to be too difficult to detect. However, P2P could look a lot like an FTP download. How's traffic analysis going to be able to tell the difference between a P2P movie download that looks like FTP from real and legit FTP? In one case you have one or two connections to a single server. Traffic during a download will be in one direction only. In the other case you have connections to multiple destinations. There is significant traffic in both directions to each destination. Do those sound similar at all?
Slashdot Mirror
Each of those files is protected by copyright. The Olympics version has copied 100% of icecube, 100% of cloud, 100% of splash sound, etc. That's not fair use.
You are right, having the same rules is not a copyright infringement in itself. But in this case it's evidence that they copied the code of the original game verbatim and that is copyright infringement.
RTFA. It's written by the author of the original game. He's hardly like to give them permission and then accuse them of theft, is he?
How exactly is Scrabulous in "flagrant violation of copyright law"? Did they copy the text of the rules wholesale? Did they use the Scrabble trademark? Scrabulous may be a blatant rip-off of Scrabble, but it's not at all clear that it violates any of Mattel's intellectual property.
The RIAA is collecting damages on the basis that the artists have suffered financial harm due to the defendants actions. The rewards are intended by the courts to compensate the artists for the damage done. The RIAA have a moral (and probably legal) obligation to distribute the money they collect to the artists.
Viewing distance calculator.
Besides, if it's the gear (rather than the fuel) that concerns them then why haven't they bothered shooting down other de-orbiting sats in the past?
They're not shooting at it to make it de-orbit, it's already de-orbiting. They are shooting at it to make sure that the hydrazine fuel tank doesn't make it down to Earth intact (or worse, almost intact).