No, you're right, we are agreeing. You can't mix and match willy nilly, if I inferred that I apologize. I merely meant to correct the other gent's inference that _any_ mod was illegal. That's all. I also think the FCC's licensing terms are a little too restrictive these days because so much IS possible now at lower costs to millions of people.
Yes, I did. And an authorized add-on antenna is, well, authorized and legal.
(b) A transmission system consisting of an intentional radiator, an external radio frequency power amplifier, and an antenna, may be authorized, marketed and used under this part. However, when a transmission system is authorized as a system, it must always be marketed as a complete system and must always be used in the configuration in which it was authorized. An external radio frequency power amplifier shall be marketed only in the system configuration with which the amplifier is authorized and shall not be marketed as a separate product.
(c) Only the antenna with which an intentional radiator is authorized may be used with the intentional radiator.
So, you're sold the entire unit, the system. The add on antennas are already authorized with the units too, and they sell the antennas "solely" for use with specified models. It's not sold as an indivudual product but as an add on for those specified units, to be used as part of a system.
Further, as per the link you pasted:
"Equipment authorization is not required for devices that are not marketed, are not constructed from a kit, and are built in quantities of five or less for personal use."
So if you crate a homebrew antenna or other mod, as long as you're with that rule, and your power output does not exceed regs, you're legal. The FCC rules aren't designed to keep people from doing anything, they're meant to ensure people don't interfere with other users of the airwaves. You'll find all throughout the regulations exceptions for small-scale users as long as they play nice.
No, it' sonly illegal to go over the maximum power output regulations. As long as you do not combine and modify equipment to operate above regulation, it's legal. That's why you can buy higher dBm antennas in Walmart, they're designed to stay within spec. It's not illegal to boost power at all, it's only boosting power over regulation that's illegal. Here's a link to a Cisco support page listing some specs.
In all honesty, you're quite right. Truly "A Civil Campaign" was targeted squarely at her female fans, intentionally or not. Love and swooning and weddings, meh. At least it did have a decent story. But I'm cool with that. I think we need more women in IT and science careers and even SciFi. I adore the Cordelia's Honor set (it's the books Shards of Honor and Barrayar in one binding for those of you wondering WTF we're on about), but more than once I've been asked why I was reading a romance novel (based purely on the cover/title). Oddly, it _is_ a romance novel, but not in the traditional sense.:)
No, Hard-SF takes very few liberties with respect to science, then examines the ramifications of it. It's as close to real science as possible while still allowing a couple semi-scientific ideas for the fiction element. But even then the SF elements aren't magical constructs, like neutronium armor or antimatter fountains or a human-AI sprouting up on a 486. IT can be very realistic and scientifically grounded.
Niven and Pournelle's "Mote in God's Eye" and it's sequel "The Gripping Hand" are very very good hard SF books, and the Moties are created by extrapolating what their biology would dictate their society be like, not just making talking plants or goldfish in spacesuits. Quite well done.
"Andromeda Strain". Classic. The original "Jurassic Park". Also very very good. Both quite good biology based books. Sure JP is a little loose with cloning and DNA recombination, but that's the SF part.
Off the top of my ehad, those are some great bio-related hard-SF books.
12 months is not that standard. 3-6 months is more standard however. Further, in most states, that particular clause is unenforceable unless you're collecting severance pay for the time period. They can't legally keep you from practicing your career in most states. Further, just keep track of all the labor law violations they commit during your stay there, and if they threaten you, threaten them back. Labor law violations can be reported up to two years after the fact.
That's what I did with my last employer. I didn't actually sign the non-compete (I told them outright when I was hired I wouldn't), and when we parted ways, it cane to the attention of the owner. I was told that they expected me to abide by it anyway as it's a condition of employment regardless of my signature. I told her I was going to be with a personal client the next day, so I obviously wasn't going to abide by it. If she wanted to sue me, that was fine. While she waited for my lawyer to get the case thrown out I'd go to the Labor Commission about all that unpaid overtime.
We've done that - we are well beyond the "Is there a problem?" and the "I wonder what the cause is" stages - we have gotten through the "What the heck can we do to fix this" part, are now into the "OK - we understand this very, very well - so now over to the politicians to implement our recommendations" phase...but everything has come to a grinding halt. (Well in some parts of the world at least).
No, see, when the President is still saying he feels scientists are still not agreeing that global warming is a problem, we are NOT past the "Is this a problem" phase. We're still convincing idiot politicians and political/religious fundamentalists that the
potential death of humanity is enough of a motivator to spend a few bucks of their precious profit now rather than later.
That's the real root of my question. I misworded it. I didn't mean to say, "How long to we argue why," I meant to say, "How long to we have to argue over who or what to blame" before we try to fix things. We keep getting stuck up with "well maybe the rising carbon dioxide levels are natural" and "well there's always been a hole in the ozone" and "hey, just thirty years ago you all thought we were headed for an ice age!" When you deforest the planet, yeah, rising CO2 levels will follow. Sure, it's possible there's always been a hole in the ozone layer, but empirical evidence showed CFCs destroyed ozone, and it didn't really cost anything in the long run to stop using CFCs. And yes, 30 years ago there was some speculation about a potential ice age, but there was never the consensus there is today, not to mention we have not just 30 more years of evidence, but 30 more years of studying the evidence we already had, and 30 more years of gathering more historical evidence too.
I'm just tired of worthless fingerpointing when we CAN do some things to try to offset our impact. Hell, even if we're NOT at fault, we'll at least stop contributing! It's a no-lose scenario. We become more energy efficient, that saves money, and puts a smaller burden on the Earth. We cut back on pollution, that makes our environment safer for us to live in. We practice more sustainable farming methods which means more food to get fat on for everyone, and less expensive to boot. We recycle more waste products saving energy and raw materials, and thus money.
I really believe the root behind the arguments against this is fear of change, and not trusting anything they don't come up with themselves. They don't want to do anything to change their established place in the world because it might pose a personal risk to them, because it's easier to do more of the same than something different.
Go ahead, mod this down too. In the end, we're going to have to act anyway. The only real question is when. How long to we wait to act. But remember this, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.
How long do we have to argue about the why before we just start to try to ADDRESS THE PROBLEM? Seriously. I don't care WHY you think the Earth is warming, all I care about is people trying to DO something about it. I really really don't care if Pat Robertson calls it Intelligent Warming because God is chilly. Why do we have to waste time arguing about the cause? If a guy comes into an ER, and passes out, they don't stand around arguing about why he passed out before they help the guy.
I hate to state the obvious, but if you make it worth their while, they will keep an eye out. "$50 if you find one" is enough to keep their eyes peeled. And if you want it bac enough, $50 is a steal.:)
I used to swear by it, but around 2002, it just sucked up too much in the way of system resources. I switched to the Corporate client and got back a lot of CPU and memory, ditched the flashy idiot-targeted UI, and kept the engine. For the past 15 years it hasn't let me down once.
So you go to the store once a year and get the new version with a rebate rather than paying full price to update online. The upshot is you have reinstall media, too.
Dude, I had no idea about that site. 2006 was kinda rough, so this makes it a little easier. I'd mod you up but you're already +5 so I'll just reply and say Thanks.:)
But would this still apply if you never promise to upgrade it? TFA says that the clarification from Apple is that they may be accused of selling unfinished products, and recognizing revenue from those unfinished products too early (which is retarded IMO, but then I'm not an accountant). If they never come out and state they WILL offer new features, but DO later with these firmware updates, could they not then claim the product was finished, but these were free bonus features? They can justly state that consumers bought the product as sold with no promises of future expansions, thus the customer wasn't buying some potentially unfulfilled future promise (which, IIRC was the point of anti-Enron laws, to keep companies from spending now money that had to be used to fulfill their obligations).
Similarly, what if: with the products there's a disclaimer that Apple makes no guarantees that there will be future product enhancements, only bug fixes for the declared product lifespan (like MS does with Windows support lifetime declarations), and that any future product enhancement that MAY exist MAY OR MAY NOT be offered for free to existing users of this product.
This is where we get asinine workarounds just to comply with poorly drafted and overly expansive laws that are crafted too quickly and reach too far. This is why accounting, and law in general, is so byzantine needed the existence of entire cadres of lawyerbots just to navigate the waters...
I agree with your point on Furtado. First album, great. Second album, pretty damn good. "Promiscuous Girl" and accompanying "music", crap. Come on, the word "promiscuous" ALONE is incredibly un-lyrical.
dude, the aHoleis going to be the unified port all those units connect with. "Take your aPod and your aPhone and your aMac and stick it in your aHole."
Remember, by the time the crew is fleshing out the story part of the game, John Carmack has finished 90% of his work on that project, and is deep in R&D of his next one. He makes the engines and structure, the rest of the team does 95% of the fleshing out. You can't really hold him responsible for everything the rest of the company does. At best, he's only partially responsible, and the blame gets spread around.
Of course, I still love all of the games, so I'm not actually complaining. For me, if it's an id game, I buy it, because I haven't not enjoyed one yet. It's like a guarantee for fun to me.
Oh please, come on. I can't stand Bush any more than the next Democrat but even I am not going to go so far off the deep end to say that this is a scheme to put money in the pockets of IT companies. Something people need to learn about crooked politicians is that they only do things for others when it benefits them. Bush has been accused of favoring big oil for obvious reasons, his connections to big oil, but no one is going to say he's going to benefit from a windfall IT upgrade cycle. If he was, he wouldn't do it by scamming DST. Please try to keep the conspiracies SOMEWHAT plausible.
For the moderation record, I'm not saying Bush is crooked, nor am I saying he is not. I'm merely pointing out how crooked politicians work. Look at Duke Cunningham or James Traficant. They threw contracts to companies in exchange for a direct benefit. They don't do favors for people, they do "business".
First I must inform you that you hurt my brain with those leaps of "logic".
Second:
... because of ridiculous laws, they are forced to purchase it at $25 a pop.
No one forced you to buy it. Don't want to pay? Don't use it.
That's $1.25 million that's going into the pocket of someone who's not providing any useful service.
No, that money is going into the pocket of the people who created Widget 3.0. That is the useful service they provided. If they don't get paid, they don't make Widget 3.1 with the bugfixes, nor Widget 4.0 that adds RSS and XML and other buzzwords.
And it's far more reasonable to call this theft, once my money is taken, I don't have it anymore.
This is how commerce works. Parties exchange money for products and services. You paid $25 to WidgetMakers in exchange for a legally licensed copy of Widget 3.0, which really is the same as a legally purchased car as opposed to a stolen one, despite your best attempts to say otherwise. You're trying to say they shouldn't be compensated for their work because nothing "physical" has changed hands. By that logic, no service employee should be paid either, because the employer didn't gain anything physical. You place no value on people's time and energy, apparently.
Slashdot Mirror
No, you're right, we are agreeing. You can't mix and match willy nilly, if I inferred that I apologize. I merely meant to correct the other gent's inference that _any_ mod was illegal. That's all. I also think the FCC's licensing terms are a little too restrictive these days because so much IS possible now at lower costs to millions of people.
Yes, I did. And an authorized add-on antenna is, well, authorized and legal.
So, you're sold the entire unit, the system. The add on antennas are already authorized with the units too, and they sell the antennas "solely" for use with specified models. It's not sold as an indivudual product but as an add on for those specified units, to be used as part of a system.
Further, as per the link you pasted:
So if you crate a homebrew antenna or other mod, as long as you're with that rule, and your power output does not exceed regs, you're legal. The FCC rules aren't designed to keep people from doing anything, they're meant to ensure people don't interfere with other users of the airwaves. You'll find all throughout the regulations exceptions for small-scale users as long as they play nice.
Right, they stay within regulations for those bits of kit. Hence my point you can do some mods while staying within regs.
No, it' sonly illegal to go over the maximum power output regulations. As long as you do not combine and modify equipment to operate above regulation, it's legal. That's why you can buy higher dBm antennas in Walmart, they're designed to stay within spec. It's not illegal to boost power at all, it's only boosting power over regulation that's illegal. Here's a link to a Cisco support page listing some specs.
In all honesty, you're quite right. Truly "A Civil Campaign" was targeted squarely at her female fans, intentionally or not. Love and swooning and weddings, meh. At least it did have a decent story. But I'm cool with that. I think we need more women in IT and science careers and even SciFi. I adore the Cordelia's Honor set (it's the books Shards of Honor and Barrayar in one binding for those of you wondering WTF we're on about), but more than once I've been asked why I was reading a romance novel (based purely on the cover/title). Oddly, it _is_ a romance novel, but not in the traditional sense. :)
LMB is tied with Niven as my all time fave SF author. The Vorkosigan Saga is awesome. I am not, however, a young woman. :)
No, Hard-SF takes very few liberties with respect to science, then examines the ramifications of it. It's as close to real science as possible while still allowing a couple semi-scientific ideas for the fiction element. But even then the SF elements aren't magical constructs, like neutronium armor or antimatter fountains or a human-AI sprouting up on a 486. IT can be very realistic and scientifically grounded.
Niven and Pournelle's "Mote in God's Eye" and it's sequel "The Gripping Hand" are very very good hard SF books, and the Moties are created by extrapolating what their biology would dictate their society be like, not just making talking plants or goldfish in spacesuits. Quite well done.
"Andromeda Strain". Classic. The original "Jurassic Park". Also very very good. Both quite good biology based books. Sure JP is a little loose with cloning and DNA recombination, but that's the SF part.
Off the top of my ehad, those are some great bio-related hard-SF books.
12 months is not that standard. 3-6 months is more standard however. Further, in most states, that particular clause is unenforceable unless you're collecting severance pay for the time period. They can't legally keep you from practicing your career in most states. Further, just keep track of all the labor law violations they commit during your stay there, and if they threaten you, threaten them back. Labor law violations can be reported up to two years after the fact.
That's what I did with my last employer. I didn't actually sign the non-compete (I told them outright when I was hired I wouldn't), and when we parted ways, it cane to the attention of the owner. I was told that they expected me to abide by it anyway as it's a condition of employment regardless of my signature. I told her I was going to be with a personal client the next day, so I obviously wasn't going to abide by it. If she wanted to sue me, that was fine. While she waited for my lawyer to get the case thrown out I'd go to the Labor Commission about all that unpaid overtime.
No, see, when the President is still saying he feels scientists are still not agreeing that global warming is a problem, we are NOT past the "Is this a problem" phase. We're still convincing idiot politicians and political/religious fundamentalists that the
potential death of humanity is enough of a motivator to spend a few bucks of their precious profit now rather than later.That's the real root of my question. I misworded it. I didn't mean to say, "How long to we argue why," I meant to say, "How long to we have to argue over who or what to blame" before we try to fix things. We keep getting stuck up with "well maybe the rising carbon dioxide levels are natural" and "well there's always been a hole in the ozone" and "hey, just thirty years ago you all thought we were headed for an ice age!" When you deforest the planet, yeah, rising CO2 levels will follow. Sure, it's possible there's always been a hole in the ozone layer, but empirical evidence showed CFCs destroyed ozone, and it didn't really cost anything in the long run to stop using CFCs. And yes, 30 years ago there was some speculation about a potential ice age, but there was never the consensus there is today, not to mention we have not just 30 more years of evidence, but 30 more years of studying the evidence we already had, and 30 more years of gathering more historical evidence too.
I'm just tired of worthless fingerpointing when we CAN do some things to try to offset our impact. Hell, even if we're NOT at fault, we'll at least stop contributing! It's a no-lose scenario. We become more energy efficient, that saves money, and puts a smaller burden on the Earth. We cut back on pollution, that makes our environment safer for us to live in. We practice more sustainable farming methods which means more food to get fat on for everyone, and less expensive to boot. We recycle more waste products saving energy and raw materials, and thus money.
I really believe the root behind the arguments against this is fear of change, and not trusting anything they don't come up with themselves. They don't want to do anything to change their established place in the world because it might pose a personal risk to them, because it's easier to do more of the same than something different.
Go ahead, mod this down too. In the end, we're going to have to act anyway. The only real question is when. How long to we wait to act. But remember this, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.
How long do we have to argue about the why before we just start to try to ADDRESS THE PROBLEM? Seriously. I don't care WHY you think the Earth is warming, all I care about is people trying to DO something about it. I really really don't care if Pat Robertson calls it Intelligent Warming because God is chilly. Why do we have to waste time arguing about the cause? If a guy comes into an ER, and passes out, they don't stand around arguing about why he passed out before they help the guy.
In contrast to non-text configuration storage methods like databases or binary blobs.
I hate to state the obvious, but if you make it worth their while, they will keep an eye out. "$50 if you find one" is enough to keep their eyes peeled. And if you want it bac enough, $50 is a steal. :)
Norton Antivirus has been around since 1990. I started using it in 1991 or 1992. MS licensed a subset of features for the MSAV that came with Dos 6.
Now, granted I'm from the future, but I don't talk about that in public.
Err, crap.
I used to swear by it, but around 2002, it just sucked up too much in the way of system resources. I switched to the Corporate client and got back a lot of CPU and memory, ditched the flashy idiot-targeted UI, and kept the engine. For the past 15 years it hasn't let me down once.
So you go to the store once a year and get the new version with a rebate rather than paying full price to update online. The upshot is you have reinstall media, too.
Dude, I had no idea about that site. 2006 was kinda rough, so this makes it a little easier. I'd mod you up but you're already +5 so I'll just reply and say Thanks. :)
But would this still apply if you never promise to upgrade it? TFA says that the clarification from Apple is that they may be accused of selling unfinished products, and recognizing revenue from those unfinished products too early (which is retarded IMO, but then I'm not an accountant). If they never come out and state they WILL offer new features, but DO later with these firmware updates, could they not then claim the product was finished, but these were free bonus features? They can justly state that consumers bought the product as sold with no promises of future expansions, thus the customer wasn't buying some potentially unfulfilled future promise (which, IIRC was the point of anti-Enron laws, to keep companies from spending now money that had to be used to fulfill their obligations).
Similarly, what if: with the products there's a disclaimer that Apple makes no guarantees that there will be future product enhancements, only bug fixes for the declared product lifespan (like MS does with Windows support lifetime declarations), and that any future product enhancement that MAY exist MAY OR MAY NOT be offered for free to existing users of this product.
This is where we get asinine workarounds just to comply with poorly drafted and overly expansive laws that are crafted too quickly and reach too far. This is why accounting, and law in general, is so byzantine needed the existence of entire cadres of lawyerbots just to navigate the waters...
I agree with your point on Furtado. First album, great. Second album, pretty damn good. "Promiscuous Girl" and accompanying "music", crap. Come on, the word "promiscuous" ALONE is incredibly un-lyrical.
dude, the aHoleis going to be the unified port all those units connect with. "Take your aPod and your aPhone and your aMac and stick it in your aHole."
Remember, by the time the crew is fleshing out the story part of the game, John Carmack has finished 90% of his work on that project, and is deep in R&D of his next one. He makes the engines and structure, the rest of the team does 95% of the fleshing out. You can't really hold him responsible for everything the rest of the company does. At best, he's only partially responsible, and the blame gets spread around.
Of course, I still love all of the games, so I'm not actually complaining. For me, if it's an id game, I buy it, because I haven't not enjoyed one yet. It's like a guarantee for fun to me.
Oh please, come on. I can't stand Bush any more than the next Democrat but even I am not going to go so far off the deep end to say that this is a scheme to put money in the pockets of IT companies. Something people need to learn about crooked politicians is that they only do things for others when it benefits them. Bush has been accused of favoring big oil for obvious reasons, his connections to big oil, but no one is going to say he's going to benefit from a windfall IT upgrade cycle. If he was, he wouldn't do it by scamming DST. Please try to keep the conspiracies SOMEWHAT plausible.
For the moderation record, I'm not saying Bush is crooked, nor am I saying he is not. I'm merely pointing out how crooked politicians work. Look at Duke Cunningham or James Traficant. They threw contracts to companies in exchange for a direct benefit. They don't do favors for people, they do "business".
Finally, I really like the 13th floor.
Awesome, me too. It instantly became one of my favorite movies. Good choice.
First I must inform you that you hurt my brain with those leaps of "logic".
Second:
No one forced you to buy it. Don't want to pay? Don't use it.
No, that money is going into the pocket of the people who created Widget 3.0. That is the useful service they provided. If they don't get paid, they don't make Widget 3.1 with the bugfixes, nor Widget 4.0 that adds RSS and XML and other buzzwords.
This is how commerce works. Parties exchange money for products and services. You paid $25 to WidgetMakers in exchange for a legally licensed copy of Widget 3.0, which really is the same as a legally purchased car as opposed to a stolen one, despite your best attempts to say otherwise. You're trying to say they shouldn't be compensated for their work because nothing "physical" has changed hands. By that logic, no service employee should be paid either, because the employer didn't gain anything physical. You place no value on people's time and energy, apparently.
Yeah, opening the source would do nothing towards making it more portable. Er, wait... ;)