Okay, this refreshes, but images, etc., will still be pulled from cache on subsequent shots unless your turn off your cache. Is there any way to do an effective ctrl-F5 (absolute refresh) automatically? More images = more bandwidth.
That sums up their whole agenda rather than just the specific issue of copy prevention.
A plea to everyone here: refuse to use the term "Digital Rights Management" in any setting.
When someone uses it, ask them what they mean, and respond "that looks more like content control." Continuing to use their invented term "DRM" keeps them continually ahead in the PR game, making it look like those trying to exercise their fair use rights are violating the rights of the corporations advocating "DRM."
A new section "expressly clarifies the applicability of other law to provide appropriate remedies for cases where known material defects are undisclosed," according to NCCUSL.
This has to be a part that Microsoft is going to fight to their last breath. We know MS sits on top of undisclosed security faults, fixing them at their leisure, and this would allow anyone hacked with an exploit known but not fixed by MS to sue MS.
And the PC is partway there. First, make the OS/BIOS/etc., not need floppies. I can flash my ASUS motherboard's BIOS without needing a DOS boot disk. Second, stop installing the floppy as an option (giving a discount as in Gateway). Third, for those few who absolutely need one, have a market of cheap USB portables.
No one PC manufacturer can have the balls to make the arbitrary decision to eliminate floppies, but Gateway's incentives are a step in the right direction.
Or perhaps a USB Key ring-style device with 32MB of memory on board, just plug it in and it mounts as a USB disk? Any data you need to carry around can be put on this key ring, and just plug it in.
They're out there. A friend of mine has one. It even has an encrypting option (requiring a small software install on the reading computer) so if you lose it, no one gets the data.
That's true, but if we're going to allow drivers on the road at all, we have to allow them to exercise judgement. I'm actually surprised more prople aren't killed with 3000 lb+ hunks of metal hurling down the highway at 55-65 mph within feet of each other, even in opposite directions which brings the closing speed to 110-130 mph. Despite the individual idiocy we see every day, that's a testament to how good things actually are.
If you want to see truly irresponsible driving on a mass scale, go to Saudi Arabia.
It's not just him. I was driving the highway between Dallas and Fort Worth around 1990, and on that 55, everyone did 70-80 -- Buick dreadnaughts and small sports cars included. In the evenings, the LA freeways (55) moved at 60-75. The people were driving according to the scientifically recognized safe 85-90 percent rule, and not the arbitrarily imposed and dangerous 55 rule.
As far as "*supposed* to be going," define that. The unnaturally low speed set by the government that hasn't saved one life, or the speed the limit is really *supposed* to be set at?
My car handles better than 99.999% of the cars out there and is rock-solid on the road at 120mph, but I know it doesn't give me license to speed stupidly. Okay, I like to take the highway entrances and corners pretty fast where I can see ahead that no one's stopped on them, and I often go 10-15 mph over the speed limit on open, straight rural roads with clear traffic. But I never do more than that (exception being clear traffic doing 120mph in a 75 taking daughter to the hospital).
The fun part is people claiming I'm speeding in the city when I just accelerate, turn and brake faster than everyone else without ever going over the limit. I never speed in the city, well in certain known safe areas maybe by 5mph, but generally no.
I do think we need to categorize the speeding discussions into city and open highway speeding. Those are two completely different circumstances.
People who think driving at high speeds is just as safe as it is at slower speeds are delusional.
Then I invite you to get on the Autobahn and do 55. THAT'S dangerous. Actually, I'd say about 65 is the most dangerous speed because then you have to pass all the trucks that go 60.
When are you people going to stop being delusional and realize that speed alone doesn't kill. Speed can be a contributing factor among others in killing someone, but they always point out speed as the one danger.
In other words, I'd prefer the Mercedes that blew past me this morning doing about 130mph, straight and steady in the left lane, to the later idiot in the SUV in front of me who couldn't figure out what lane she wanted to be in and almost ran me over.
Finite reaction time: Ever heard of driving according to conditions and keeping proper distance? There's a finite reaction time at any speed. Adjust accordingly.
Kinetic energy: Doesn't come into play if you don't crash. It's not a cause of accidents, it's a factor in the severity of the accidents should they happen.
Mechanical stress: Don't drive fast if your car can't take it. Is that too complicated for people to understand? My car is essentially a race car, is well taken care of, and can safely do 100mph+ all day long. Yours? Is your old beat-up Nova safe at even 40mph? Do you have reliable high-speed rated tires, or are you trying to do 100mph on some worn-out P-rated retreads (mine are W)? There are places around my home where I won't even go up to the speed limit in the family car, but I do so easily in the sports car.
You pretty much said everything for me. Except that in Germany they do have a habit of tailgating left-lane hogs. It's an example of one illegal act bringing on another. Same with people passing the hogs on the right, which is illegal too, but also wouldn't happen if the people hadn't been hogging the road in the first place.
In Germany, I feel much safer just driving fast and passing most everyone. It's simple, as you just have to watch out ahead for people pulling out in front of you, or slowed traffic. It's easy to anticipate those pulling out (such as coming up behind a truck) and keeping proper distance for conditions invalidates the "reaction time!" cry -- I've compensated for it. Just keep an eye on the mirror for a really fast Porsche or Mercedes.
Driving middle-speed is scary, because you're constantly weaving in and out to pass slow trucks, with each lane change being another chance for an accident.
The only thing I'm really afraid of are drivers of large vehicles not paying attention and ramming me in the back when I'm at the end of a traffic jam. I make sure to leave lots of room for me to floor it out of their way should that happen.
In short, none of the examples you provided show the "slippery slope" type of progression towards mandatory use by law that the original post was so paranoid about.
Social Security numbers are a good example of mission creep. They used to be -- by law -- only for that one purpose, and considered very private. Now you need it to do almost anything and is a national personal ID number.
But more specifically, third brake lights are a good example. In the late 80s-early 90s they were optional and could save you a few percent on your insurance. Now they're standard on every car, and many insurance companies will probably charge you more if you don't have one.
Having realistic speed limits in most places kind of makes you respect the low speed limits, dosn't it? When I'm on a German road and I suddenly see a low speed limit I've never seen before, I damn sure slow down. In America, I know there's probably no safety reason for it.
The only ones in Germany that get me are the 62mph for "noise protection" so you're not too loud for those people who just built houses next to the Autobahn.
Actually, speed doesn't kill -- speed differential kills. In Germany, the Autobahn speed limit is unlimited, but falling to 75-80 in areas where slowing down is wise (such as near congestion, city, etc.). Yet Autobahn accident rates are usually less than what they are in the U.S.
Why? Aside from better driver training, there is a minimum speed you must maintain to be on the Autobahn (minimizing the speed differential), you must stay to the right unless passing, and passing on the right is very illegal. The deaths are even far lower than on the normal streets.
Traffic engineers say that the speed limit should be about 85-90% of the speed at which most people would drive if there weren't a speed limit. This gets raised to 90-95% in open highways. That is pure safety and efficiency, no politics ("55") involved.
I have to admit that one of these boxes could have saved me some grief when a girl at a gas station backed up and over onto the hood of my car. Later her dad was screaming that I must have hit her, which would have been hard with my engine off and parking brake on -- all of which would have been recorded.
the brake in an emergency and bam, there goes your rating. Stomp on the gas to get out of the way? Yep, rating goes down. Perform a sharp turn to avoid a collision?
In other words my insurance company's analysis of my box after track days would be interesting: "Let's see, this weekend we have 124 turns at.8-.9g, accelerator down flat 79% of the time, brakes down flat 19% of the time, 11x0-60 in 5.6, and I see a spin-out."
The statistic at my wife's old high school said X number of students dead that year from alcohol related accidents and made a big stink about it.
What they failed to mention was that in all but one the adult driver was the one drinking, and in the other the students were drinking but there was no way they could have avoided getting hit as in your example.
That's why in many countries, you're on probation for the first few years of having your license that you can get at 18. Accidents with gross negligence on the teen's part will get the license yanked for a couple of years.
Slashdot Mirror
Okay, this refreshes, but images, etc., will still be pulled from cache on subsequent shots unless your turn off your cache. Is there any way to do an effective ctrl-F5 (absolute refresh) automatically? More images = more bandwidth.
That sums up their whole agenda rather than just the specific issue of copy prevention.
A plea to everyone here: refuse to use the term "Digital Rights Management" in any setting.
When someone uses it, ask them what they mean, and respond "that looks more like content control." Continuing to use their invented term "DRM" keeps them continually ahead in the PR game, making it look like those trying to exercise their fair use rights are violating the rights of the corporations advocating "DRM."
A new section "expressly clarifies the applicability of other law to provide appropriate remedies for cases where known material defects are undisclosed," according to NCCUSL.
This has to be a part that Microsoft is going to fight to their last breath. We know MS sits on top of undisclosed security faults, fixing them at their leisure, and this would allow anyone hacked with an exploit known but not fixed by MS to sue MS.
And the PC is partway there. First, make the OS/BIOS/etc., not need floppies. I can flash my ASUS motherboard's BIOS without needing a DOS boot disk. Second, stop installing the floppy as an option (giving a discount as in Gateway). Third, for those few who absolutely need one, have a market of cheap USB portables.
No one PC manufacturer can have the balls to make the arbitrary decision to eliminate floppies, but Gateway's incentives are a step in the right direction.
Or perhaps a USB Key ring-style device with 32MB of memory on board, just plug it in and it mounts as a USB disk? Any data you need to carry around can be put on this key ring, and just plug it in.
They're out there. A friend of mine has one. It even has an encrypting option (requiring a small software install on the reading computer) so if you lose it, no one gets the data.
That's true, but if we're going to allow drivers on the road at all, we have to allow them to exercise judgement. I'm actually surprised more prople aren't killed with 3000 lb+ hunks of metal hurling down the highway at 55-65 mph within feet of each other, even in opposite directions which brings the closing speed to 110-130 mph. Despite the individual idiocy we see every day, that's a testament to how good things actually are.
If you want to see truly irresponsible driving on a mass scale, go to Saudi Arabia.
Lotus Elise, or as some call it, "Tupperware Rocket" (except that tupperware doesn't leak).
That's not the sole benefit, and it's not just 2 minutes.
In many cases, there is very little benefit from speeding. Most people commuting to work will save max. a few minutes.
However, people like me with a 40 mile one-way commute mostly on fairly unpacked highways can save big time by going faster.
Nice link. It summarizes much of what I've heard.
BTW, nice Porker (sorry, good natured humor, our nickname for a Porsche).
It's not just him. I was driving the highway between Dallas and Fort Worth around 1990, and on that 55, everyone did 70-80 -- Buick dreadnaughts and small sports cars included. In the evenings, the LA freeways (55) moved at 60-75. The people were driving according to the scientifically recognized safe 85-90 percent rule, and not the arbitrarily imposed and dangerous 55 rule.
As far as "*supposed* to be going," define that. The unnaturally low speed set by the government that hasn't saved one life, or the speed the limit is really *supposed* to be set at?
My car handles better than 99.999% of the cars out there and is rock-solid on the road at 120mph, but I know it doesn't give me license to speed stupidly. Okay, I like to take the highway entrances and corners pretty fast where I can see ahead that no one's stopped on them, and I often go 10-15 mph over the speed limit on open, straight rural roads with clear traffic. But I never do more than that (exception being clear traffic doing 120mph in a 75 taking daughter to the hospital).
The fun part is people claiming I'm speeding in the city when I just accelerate, turn and brake faster than everyone else without ever going over the limit. I never speed in the city, well in certain known safe areas maybe by 5mph, but generally no.
I do think we need to categorize the speeding discussions into city and open highway speeding. Those are two completely different circumstances.
People who think driving at high speeds is just as safe as it is at slower speeds are delusional.
Then I invite you to get on the Autobahn and do 55. THAT'S dangerous. Actually, I'd say about 65 is the most dangerous speed because then you have to pass all the trucks that go 60.
When are you people going to stop being delusional and realize that speed alone doesn't kill. Speed can be a contributing factor among others in killing someone, but they always point out speed as the one danger.
In other words, I'd prefer the Mercedes that blew past me this morning doing about 130mph, straight and steady in the left lane, to the later idiot in the SUV in front of me who couldn't figure out what lane she wanted to be in and almost ran me over.
You pretty much said everything for me. Except that in Germany they do have a habit of tailgating left-lane hogs. It's an example of one illegal act bringing on another. Same with people passing the hogs on the right, which is illegal too, but also wouldn't happen if the people hadn't been hogging the road in the first place.
In Germany, I feel much safer just driving fast and passing most everyone. It's simple, as you just have to watch out ahead for people pulling out in front of you, or slowed traffic. It's easy to anticipate those pulling out (such as coming up behind a truck) and keeping proper distance for conditions invalidates the "reaction time!" cry -- I've compensated for it. Just keep an eye on the mirror for a really fast Porsche or Mercedes.
Driving middle-speed is scary, because you're constantly weaving in and out to pass slow trucks, with each lane change being another chance for an accident.
The only thing I'm really afraid of are drivers of large vehicles not paying attention and ramming me in the back when I'm at the end of a traffic jam. I make sure to leave lots of room for me to floor it out of their way should that happen.
In short, none of the examples you provided show the "slippery slope" type of progression towards mandatory use by law that the original post was so paranoid about.
Social Security numbers are a good example of mission creep. They used to be -- by law -- only for that one purpose, and considered very private. Now you need it to do almost anything and is a national personal ID number.
But more specifically, third brake lights are a good example. In the late 80s-early 90s they were optional and could save you a few percent on your insurance. Now they're standard on every car, and many insurance companies will probably charge you more if you don't have one.
I think someone's confusing being able to tell which cell you're on with GPS.
It's illegal to deactivate the airbag in your car without specific permission.
Having realistic speed limits in most places kind of makes you respect the low speed limits, dosn't it? When I'm on a German road and I suddenly see a low speed limit I've never seen before, I damn sure slow down. In America, I know there's probably no safety reason for it.
The only ones in Germany that get me are the 62mph for "noise protection" so you're not too loud for those people who just built houses next to the Autobahn.
Actually, speed doesn't kill -- speed differential kills. In Germany, the Autobahn speed limit is unlimited, but falling to 75-80 in areas where slowing down is wise (such as near congestion, city, etc.). Yet Autobahn accident rates are usually less than what they are in the U.S.
Why? Aside from better driver training, there is a minimum speed you must maintain to be on the Autobahn (minimizing the speed differential), you must stay to the right unless passing, and passing on the right is very illegal. The deaths are even far lower than on the normal streets.
Traffic engineers say that the speed limit should be about 85-90% of the speed at which most people would drive if there weren't a speed limit. This gets raised to 90-95% in open highways. That is pure safety and efficiency, no politics ("55") involved.
by using the right lane, except to pass.
Wow, you just described the driving laws in much of the rest of the world, especially Germany.
I have to admit that one of these boxes could have saved me some grief when a girl at a gas station backed up and over onto the hood of my car. Later her dad was screaming that I must have hit her, which would have been hard with my engine off and parking brake on -- all of which would have been recorded.
the brake in an emergency and bam, there goes your rating. Stomp on the gas to get out of the way? Yep, rating goes down. Perform a sharp turn to avoid a collision?
.8-.9g, accelerator down flat 79% of the time, brakes down flat 19% of the time, 11x0-60 in 5.6, and I see a spin-out."
In other words my insurance company's analysis of my box after track days would be interesting: "Let's see, this weekend we have 124 turns at
My rates will be at national-debt level!
You wanna see your rates skyrocket? Join the military. I hear that guys in their early 20s, with a hot car, and in the service have the highest rates.
Ain't that the truth. I was 21 with a used 4 y/o VW Scirocco, and the rates were insane.
The statistic at my wife's old high school said X number of students dead that year from alcohol related accidents and made a big stink about it.
What they failed to mention was that in all but one the adult driver was the one drinking, and in the other the students were drinking but there was no way they could have avoided getting hit as in your example.
That's why in many countries, you're on probation for the first few years of having your license that you can get at 18. Accidents with gross negligence on the teen's part will get the license yanked for a couple of years.