"Here are some designs from 2006." is evidence. You raise questions that could affect how that evidence would be understood and treated by jurors, and it is Apple's right to present that evidence to jurors too. But that doesn't make it not evidence. It up to a jury to decide how much credibility to lend it and how it pertains to the charges, but they have to be shown it first.
Call me old fashioned but I'd like to hear the evidence before making a judgement.
Unfortunately the judge decided Samsung couldn't show the Jurors the evidence in court and then got mad when Samsung did show you the evidence through the media. You want to see the evidence? You have to at least raise an eyebrow when it's suppressed.
Censorship doesn't mean the government is doing, just someone with power or authority on a given arena. Apple has authority and power over their bookstore so they are able to censor content on it.
The knowledge they are buying in this case seems to be the specific experience porting games to Linux. That makes sense. It's a particular task and type of programming. If they were just going after programmers who know how to write software for desktop Linux that would be silly. It's not sufficiently different from writing software for platform X to justify limiting your candidate pool. Employing "Windows or whatever devs" is fine as long as they are competent, and I wouldn't want an incompetent programmer no matter which platform he was most familiar using.
The idea that there are programmers who are "Linux experts" is silly. The difference between programming for Linux and programming for Windows, and programming for whatever other general-purpose platform with moderately mature tools is insignificant. It makes even less sense to seek a "Linux programmer" than it does to seek a "C++ programmer." If you want some expertise beyond just programmer then you look for domain knowledge like 3d engine programming or distributed system programming, or maybe limited resource programming. This guy doesn't look like a Linux programmer. He looks like a guy with a very specific skill set, porting games from Windows to Linux.
While public domain, a complete listing of the laws of physics has not been made available to the public. He's going to have to find an alternate universe for his scheme.
The article has it right. When dealing with changes in energy you have to consider the frame of reference. From the train's frame of reference, which is moving with respect to the Earth's, any incremental change in velocity results in the same change in kinetic energy. Consider this thought experiment. You are on a stationary train. You stand up and begin walking forward at 5 mph. Later the train is moving at 100 mph. You stand up and walk forward at 5 mph. From your point of view the change in kinetic energy both times was the same. It did not take more energy for you to walk on the moving train vs. the stationary one.
A private company offers an opt in filtering service, and they hire religious people to help them set up that service. Okay, sounds like something I absolutely do not want. But who am I to tell other people they can't have it. It's not bothering me any.
Most recycling starts out cost prohibitive because it's inefficient. The profits come from subsidy. The glue makes it even more inefficient, and so the required subsidy is bigger if they're going to bother.
Remember that a right doesn't necessarily mean that you are owed that thing by society. Some right are like that. For example the right to vote implies that you are owed the opportunity and reasonable means by which to vote. But most enumerated rights are things that you must not be barred from. For example free speech. The right of free speech means you are free to speak your mind, it does not mean that someone somewhere owes you speech. So for the GP's rights to enjoy the arts or paid time off, it's reasonable for those to be rights in the "don't interfere" sense, just not the "you are owed" sense.
That would depend on whether you were trying to sell the trophy for significantly more than the value of the legos used to make it. If the legos cost $100 and you sell the trophy for $500 then clearly the more valuable part of the trophy is the labor and artistic expression that went into making the trophy from the legos. In that case it would make sense to say it was made wherever you made it.
Drinking tap water is safe. So you wouldn't mind if I submerged you in a tub of it for an hour? Playing tennis is safe. So you wouldn't mind if I made you play in a hurricane? Reading slashdot is safe. So you wouldn't mind if I made you sit there reading it for a week while force feeding you cheetos?
That chart is the composition of sea water not of sea salt. Sea salts you obtain to eat are sodium chloride salts perhaps with some other minerals mixed in, but not at those proportions. All I was saying is that while the small amounts of other minerals found in some sea salts can affect the flavor, most of the difference in how you perceive it when eating it is coming from the different texture rather than from the mineral composition.
When I said exclusively sodium chloride salts I didn't mean to imply that I was referring only to salts that have no other minerals at all in them. I was just trying to preempt someone from claiming that Epsom salts taste plenty different from table salt.
The different tastes you get for salt* are mainly due to texture. Fleur de sel, for example, is fine and irregular. If you get salt from this process at all, and maybe you don't since it could just stay dissolved in the water on the other side, it probably has a different texture than sea salt obtained from evaporation.
*Pedants, I'm referring exclusively to sodium chloride salt here.
I mean I have nothing against them. But their advantage is being cheap commodities. The expensive part of space travel is the traveling to space part. Why go cheap on the components?
They aren't. Chimpanzee is a genus (Pan) not a species. Bonobo (Pan paniscus) is a species on chimpanzee. The other extant species of chimpanzee is the common chimpanzee (Pan troglodytes). Those two species of chimpanzee are diffierent species from one another for the same reason any other two species of animal in the same genus are, they can't reliably produce offspring that can themselves reliably produce offspring.
I think you're vastly overestimating people. I think the controversy controversy comes primarily from the fact that most people don't understand genetics at all; it sounds scary to them, so they fear anything that deals with it. Natural is good, and unnatural is bad. It's a similar deal with nuclear power, really, where the thing I can't see and don't understand is inherently too scary to permit.
Slashdot Mirror
So what if Apple had designs first? It's data pertinent to the claims. That makes it evidence.
"Here are some designs from 2006." is evidence. You raise questions that could affect how that evidence would be understood and treated by jurors, and it is Apple's right to present that evidence to jurors too. But that doesn't make it not evidence. It up to a jury to decide how much credibility to lend it and how it pertains to the charges, but they have to be shown it first.
What makes them not evidence?
Call me old fashioned but I'd like to hear the evidence before making a judgement.
Unfortunately the judge decided Samsung couldn't show the Jurors the evidence in court and then got mad when Samsung did show you the evidence through the media. You want to see the evidence? You have to at least raise an eyebrow when it's suppressed.
Participating in the same argument from multiple accounts is dishonest.
Censorship doesn't mean the government is doing, just someone with power or authority on a given arena. Apple has authority and power over their bookstore so they are able to censor content on it.
The knowledge they are buying in this case seems to be the specific experience porting games to Linux. That makes sense. It's a particular task and type of programming. If they were just going after programmers who know how to write software for desktop Linux that would be silly. It's not sufficiently different from writing software for platform X to justify limiting your candidate pool. Employing "Windows or whatever devs" is fine as long as they are competent, and I wouldn't want an incompetent programmer no matter which platform he was most familiar using.
The idea that there are programmers who are "Linux experts" is silly. The difference between programming for Linux and programming for Windows, and programming for whatever other general-purpose platform with moderately mature tools is insignificant. It makes even less sense to seek a "Linux programmer" than it does to seek a "C++ programmer." If you want some expertise beyond just programmer then you look for domain knowledge like 3d engine programming or distributed system programming, or maybe limited resource programming. This guy doesn't look like a Linux programmer. He looks like a guy with a very specific skill set, porting games from Windows to Linux.
While public domain, a complete listing of the laws of physics has not been made available to the public. He's going to have to find an alternate universe for his scheme.
The article has it right. When dealing with changes in energy you have to consider the frame of reference. From the train's frame of reference, which is moving with respect to the Earth's, any incremental change in velocity results in the same change in kinetic energy. Consider this thought experiment. You are on a stationary train. You stand up and begin walking forward at 5 mph. Later the train is moving at 100 mph. You stand up and walk forward at 5 mph. From your point of view the change in kinetic energy both times was the same. It did not take more energy for you to walk on the moving train vs. the stationary one.
A private company offers an opt in filtering service, and they hire religious people to help them set up that service. Okay, sounds like something I absolutely do not want. But who am I to tell other people they can't have it. It's not bothering me any.
San Francisco does today what the more advanced parts of the developed world will do tomorrow.
Now there's a depressing thought.
Most recycling starts out cost prohibitive because it's inefficient. The profits come from subsidy. The glue makes it even more inefficient, and so the required subsidy is bigger if they're going to bother.
No, no, no. If you _really_ care about the environment you should kill yourself somewhere wildlife can eat you. Two for one.
Or it's not so simple as a binary care not care switch. There are many competing cares and desires that different people weight differently.
Ah, Poe's law.
It claims "The Walking Dead is a story" which is just not true.
Remember that a right doesn't necessarily mean that you are owed that thing by society. Some right are like that. For example the right to vote implies that you are owed the opportunity and reasonable means by which to vote. But most enumerated rights are things that you must not be barred from. For example free speech. The right of free speech means you are free to speak your mind, it does not mean that someone somewhere owes you speech. So for the GP's rights to enjoy the arts or paid time off, it's reasonable for those to be rights in the "don't interfere" sense, just not the "you are owed" sense.
That would depend on whether you were trying to sell the trophy for significantly more than the value of the legos used to make it. If the legos cost $100 and you sell the trophy for $500 then clearly the more valuable part of the trophy is the labor and artistic expression that went into making the trophy from the legos. In that case it would make sense to say it was made wherever you made it.
Come on. You can do that with anything.
Drinking tap water is safe. So you wouldn't mind if I submerged you in a tub of it for an hour?
Playing tennis is safe. So you wouldn't mind if I made you play in a hurricane?
Reading slashdot is safe. So you wouldn't mind if I made you sit there reading it for a week while force feeding you cheetos?
That chart is the composition of sea water not of sea salt. Sea salts you obtain to eat are sodium chloride salts perhaps with some other minerals mixed in, but not at those proportions. All I was saying is that while the small amounts of other minerals found in some sea salts can affect the flavor, most of the difference in how you perceive it when eating it is coming from the different texture rather than from the mineral composition.
When I said exclusively sodium chloride salts I didn't mean to imply that I was referring only to salts that have no other minerals at all in them. I was just trying to preempt someone from claiming that Epsom salts taste plenty different from table salt.
The different tastes you get for salt* are mainly due to texture. Fleur de sel, for example, is fine and irregular. If you get salt from this process at all, and maybe you don't since it could just stay dissolved in the water on the other side, it probably has a different texture than sea salt obtained from evaporation.
*Pedants, I'm referring exclusively to sodium chloride salt here.
Am I supposed to be impressed or something?
No, you are supposed to be amused. Not your cup of tea? Fine. But you should see a doctor about the stick.
I mean I have nothing against them. But their advantage is being cheap commodities. The expensive part of space travel is the traveling to space part. Why go cheap on the components?
They aren't. Chimpanzee is a genus (Pan) not a species. Bonobo (Pan paniscus) is a species on chimpanzee. The other extant species of chimpanzee is the common chimpanzee (Pan troglodytes). Those two species of chimpanzee are diffierent species from one another for the same reason any other two species of animal in the same genus are, they can't reliably produce offspring that can themselves reliably produce offspring.
I think you're vastly overestimating people. I think the controversy controversy comes primarily from the fact that most people don't understand genetics at all; it sounds scary to them, so they fear anything that deals with it. Natural is good, and unnatural is bad. It's a similar deal with nuclear power, really, where the thing I can't see and don't understand is inherently too scary to permit.