Man sues manufacturer and sell of equipment to a government which then uses it to do something legal in the country which causes him to be imprisoned by the government.
Next, we will have a pedophile suing Dell for supplying him the computer he used to download videos of little girls being raped.
I have apparently angered the local Slashdot bury brigade, or at least a small group who are actively modding down all my comments, both present and past.
Less than two weeks ago, I had excellent karma. Now, it is terrible and any time I get a positive mod, commentsI have made in the past are modded down. I have had comments that were +4 Insightful modded down to -1 Over-rated/Redundant.
And, what happens when those students go out into the real world?
They will go to a business and be put in front of a Windows computer with MS Office. They will be expected to know how to use the desktop and laptop platform most widely used in business. And, they will struggle to do so. If they do bad enough, they may not make it through the customary 90 day evaluation period. If they ask to use a Mac, the response will almost certainly be no. The business isn't going to buy a special computer and software just for them and they will not be allowed to use their computer for business.
Those students are going to suffer because you are an Apple fanboy who is giving bad advice based on your limited experience.
You call verifying a person is who they claim to be by matching them to their proffered documents political correctness? No, political correctness is doing exactly what you describe, allowing Muslim women are allowed to board planes without having to lift their veils to prove their face matches the one on the passport.
You are not singled out for scrutiny. All people are checked, with a random few checked more closely than others, and the reason it is like that is because of people, like you, who believe in political correctness even if you can not recognize it if you see it. The reason all are checked is because if the government checks only those most likely to be terrorists and suicide bombers, then they are accused of racism, racial profiling, etc. by people like YOU.
Because someone can intend to do something and never get a chance to do it. One can be a terrorist because one intends to commit a terrorist act, but no do the act because one is stopped.
Also, if one does not wish to be scanned, one does not have to fly on a commercial flight. One can charter a flight. One can learn to fly and rent a plane. One can take a bus or a train.
"Can" and "Do" are separate things. While scanners may have the ability to do so, the function may be disabled, therefore the scanners would not do so.
Unfortunately, Masnick is not a lawyer and, even if he were a lawyer, his opinion doesn't really matter.
Whether or not Masnick or anyone else likes, both sides have valid arguments. Networking equipment is privately owned. The networks that make up the Internet are, to a very large extent, privately owned. But, the Internet is being used as a medium of free speech. The question is where does one's rights end and the other person's rights begin.
This is something that would have to be decided by Congress and/or the Supreme Court, probably the latter.
What do you mean by "extended periods"? I would agree if we were talking about hours of use at maximum, or even half an hour. But, we are talking about a cut scene that is going to last, what, 5 minutes? If a card can not run at its full potential/maximum for a cut scene, then the card is designed wrong and is under-engineered. And, if the designers/manufacturers of the card know that it can not perform at its full potential without self-destructing, then they should limit the cards performance to safe levels, just like cars now have rev limiters to prevent someone from blowing the engine.
And, a card, just like a car engine, can be designed to run at its maximum for an extended period.
The thing is, he didn't have the right to do this because it was not his iPhone. The law gives one the right to jailbreak one's own phone, not phones owned by Apple.
Yes, please explain how you have a right to use someone else's network and equipment regardless of the desires of the owners of said network and equipment. Do you also believe that one should have the right to force a newspaper to print one's writings as well?
Actually, no. The First Amendment states that "Congress shall make no law... abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press,..." The First Amendment would not apply because the government is not imposing any restrictions.
While one has a right to free speech, one does not have a right to use other's facilities to exercise that right. One may get a soap box and give a speech in a public location but one does not have a right to go onto private property and do the same thing because it is private property. A newspaper is not required to publish one's letter or article because it is private property, and refusal to do so is not a violation of one's First Amendment rights because it is a private business. One cannot go into a private business and demand to use the address system to give a speech because both are private property and one has no right to use them.
The only one who has a right to use privately owned equipment is the owner, and even then, that use might be restricted or regulated.
A non-neutral net does not violate one's First Amendment right to free speech because the government is not limiting anything and one's free speech is no more limited by this than by one being denied access to the address system at Walmart to give an anti-consumerism speech.
An Internet connection is a connection to a private network, and as such, the owner's of said network can, to a large degree, control the bandwidth allocation. The government may limit such control, but the degree it may do so is not well defined. TFA makes an argument that by dictating that one must allow traffic across one's network one does not wish to allow, the government is taking de facto control of a privately owned asset for use by the general public. Said argument has some merit.
This sounds more like a design issue with the cards than an issue with StarCraft 2. If the card can not handle performing at its full potential, then the card was under-engineered in the first place.
It is not rubbish. It is an account hijacking prevention feature. Remember, all one needs to access one's paypal account is an email address and password. If you are in one country and someone tries to access your account in another country, it makes sense to require re-authorization to ensure the account has not been compromised.
There is always some idiot complaining on slashdotabout some company that made or sold something they bought right after they did something or something changed or an upgrade failed or they just don't like something.
There, fixed that for you.
Come on, people. You are supposed to be nerds and geeks. Stop whining and fix it.
First, one should learn to use one's business applications. (MS Office) Then, one should learn the macro/automation language of said business applications. (VBA) Then, if one has time and inclination, a scripting language, or two, for the OS. (Powershell) After that, it is a toss up. Java, Javascript, C#, C/C++. But, I doubt a non-techie will ever get this far.
First and foremost, non-techies want to use technology to improve their and their business' efficiency. They need to stop investing time and effort into tech and programming as soon as it starts to take time away from their core business.
Please explain why it would be fair? The programmer is creating a work for hire. He does not hold copyright to the code, nor does he have any ability to license the code. If he does not like what he is paid, he can quite and someone else will be hired to replace him.
If the programmer wants to make $100,000.00 per day, he should quit and write his own high frequency trading system and then use it.
Looking at the methodology, I notice that they do not take into account operational lifetime and repair/replacement costs.
Solar panels will lose generating capacity over their life time. Most panels will lose about 85% of their generating capacity within 30 years. Because of this, if the goal is to generate a minimum of 10 MW of electricity over 30 years, one must start with almost 12 MW of generating capacity. The other option would be to continually add panels to make up the short fall, which adds cost. This does not include maintenance and repair costs. How much damage would be done by a hail storm, tornado, hurricane, or just a very strong wind storm?
Nuclear power plants are designed with a lifespan of 30-40 years, during which they will not lose any generating capacity. Almost every part of nuclear plant can be replaced except the actual reactor vessel. Because of this, nuclear plants have a much longer life span than designed. They are issued licenses for 10 years of operation and every 10 years must be re-evaluated by a safety commission to get a new license. The plants themselves are designed to withstand extreme weather and physical attack. The generation plants can be upgraded to new and better generators and more efficient turbines as they are developed.
To me, it seems that this study only addresses initial cost. It does not seem to address total cost of ownership over the lifetime of the plant/farm.
Slashdot Mirror
Sue the city and the cops for malicious prosecution.
Man sues manufacturer and sell of equipment to a government which then uses it to do something legal in the country which causes him to be imprisoned by the government.
Next, we will have a pedophile suing Dell for supplying him the computer he used to download videos of little girls being raped.
I have no doubt that the "higher level prosecutor" is a support of Wikileaks and made the case go away to protect the raping SOB.
I bet the victims were threatened into silence by wikileaks fans hunting them down.
I have apparently angered the local Slashdot bury brigade, or at least a small group who are actively modding down all my comments, both present and past.
Less than two weeks ago, I had excellent karma. Now, it is terrible and any time I get a positive mod, commentsI have made in the past are modded down. I have had comments that were +4 Insightful modded down to -1 Over-rated/Redundant.
And, what happens when those students go out into the real world?
They will go to a business and be put in front of a Windows computer with MS Office. They will be expected to know how to use the desktop and laptop platform most widely used in business. And, they will struggle to do so. If they do bad enough, they may not make it through the customary 90 day evaluation period. If they ask to use a Mac, the response will almost certainly be no. The business isn't going to buy a special computer and software just for them and they will not be allowed to use their computer for business.
Those students are going to suffer because you are an Apple fanboy who is giving bad advice based on your limited experience.
And what happens when those students go out into the real world and don't know how to use the Windows computer their company requires?
You call verifying a person is who they claim to be by matching them to their proffered documents political correctness? No, political correctness is doing exactly what you describe, allowing Muslim women are allowed to board planes without having to lift their veils to prove their face matches the one on the passport.
You are not singled out for scrutiny. All people are checked, with a random few checked more closely than others, and the reason it is like that is because of people, like you, who believe in political correctness even if you can not recognize it if you see it. The reason all are checked is because if the government checks only those most likely to be terrorists and suicide bombers, then they are accused of racism, racial profiling, etc. by people like YOU.
Because someone can intend to do something and never get a chance to do it. One can be a terrorist because one intends to commit a terrorist act, but no do the act because one is stopped.
Also, if one does not wish to be scanned, one does not have to fly on a commercial flight. One can charter a flight. One can learn to fly and rent a plane. One can take a bus or a train.
Parsing failure: Invalid nesting at line 11. No end tag for element "word" before end of element "sentence".
"Can" and "Do" are separate things. While scanners may have the ability to do so, the function may be disabled, therefore the scanners would not do so.
Unfortunately, Masnick is not a lawyer and, even if he were a lawyer, his opinion doesn't really matter.
Whether or not Masnick or anyone else likes, both sides have valid arguments. Networking equipment is privately owned. The networks that make up the Internet are, to a very large extent, privately owned. But, the Internet is being used as a medium of free speech. The question is where does one's rights end and the other person's rights begin.
This is something that would have to be decided by Congress and/or the Supreme Court, probably the latter.
What do you mean by "extended periods"? I would agree if we were talking about hours of use at maximum, or even half an hour. But, we are talking about a cut scene that is going to last, what, 5 minutes? If a card can not run at its full potential/maximum for a cut scene, then the card is designed wrong and is under-engineered. And, if the designers/manufacturers of the card know that it can not perform at its full potential without self-destructing, then they should limit the cards performance to safe levels, just like cars now have rev limiters to prevent someone from blowing the engine.
And, a card, just like a car engine, can be designed to run at its maximum for an extended period.
The thing is, he didn't have the right to do this because it was not his iPhone. The law gives one the right to jailbreak one's own phone, not phones owned by Apple.
Yes, please explain how you have a right to use someone else's network and equipment regardless of the desires of the owners of said network and equipment. Do you also believe that one should have the right to force a newspaper to print one's writings as well?
Actually, no. The First Amendment states that "Congress shall make no law ... abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, ..." The First Amendment would not apply because the government is not imposing any restrictions.
While one has a right to free speech, one does not have a right to use other's facilities to exercise that right. One may get a soap box and give a speech in a public location but one does not have a right to go onto private property and do the same thing because it is private property. A newspaper is not required to publish one's letter or article because it is private property, and refusal to do so is not a violation of one's First Amendment rights because it is a private business. One cannot go into a private business and demand to use the address system to give a speech because both are private property and one has no right to use them.
The only one who has a right to use privately owned equipment is the owner, and even then, that use might be restricted or regulated.
A non-neutral net does not violate one's First Amendment right to free speech because the government is not limiting anything and one's free speech is no more limited by this than by one being denied access to the address system at Walmart to give an anti-consumerism speech.
An Internet connection is a connection to a private network, and as such, the owner's of said network can, to a large degree, control the bandwidth allocation. The government may limit such control, but the degree it may do so is not well defined. TFA makes an argument that by dictating that one must allow traffic across one's network one does not wish to allow, the government is taking de facto control of a privately owned asset for use by the general public. Said argument has some merit.
This sounds more like a design issue with the cards than an issue with StarCraft 2. If the card can not handle performing at its full potential, then the card was under-engineered in the first place.
In other words, PayPal is not for people who travel internationally a great deal. Rather, it is designed for the other 99% of the public.
It is not rubbish. It is an account hijacking prevention feature. Remember, all one needs to access one's paypal account is an email address and password. If you are in one country and someone tries to access your account in another country, it makes sense to require re-authorization to ensure the account has not been compromised.
There, fixed that for you.
Come on, people. You are supposed to be nerds and geeks. Stop whining and fix it.
Population of the UK: 61,414,062
Signatories: 6,000
0.01 percent of the population made this demand of the government which would have taken time and money to do. No wonder the government said no.
First, one should learn to use one's business applications. (MS Office)
Then, one should learn the macro/automation language of said business applications. (VBA)
Then, if one has time and inclination, a scripting language, or two, for the OS. (Powershell)
After that, it is a toss up. Java, Javascript, C#, C/C++. But, I doubt a non-techie will ever get this far.
First and foremost, non-techies want to use technology to improve their and their business' efficiency. They need to stop investing time and effort into tech and programming as soon as it starts to take time away from their core business.
They can quite, write their own high frequency trading system and then use it to make money for themselves.
Or, they can stop creating works for higher.
Please explain why it would be fair? The programmer is creating a work for hire. He does not hold copyright to the code, nor does he have any ability to license the code. If he does not like what he is paid, he can quite and someone else will be hired to replace him.
If the programmer wants to make $100,000.00 per day, he should quit and write his own high frequency trading system and then use it.
Looking at the methodology, I notice that they do not take into account operational lifetime and repair/replacement costs.
Solar panels will lose generating capacity over their life time. Most panels will lose about 85% of their generating capacity within 30 years. Because of this, if the goal is to generate a minimum of 10 MW of electricity over 30 years, one must start with almost 12 MW of generating capacity. The other option would be to continually add panels to make up the short fall, which adds cost. This does not include maintenance and repair costs. How much damage would be done by a hail storm, tornado, hurricane, or just a very strong wind storm?
Nuclear power plants are designed with a lifespan of 30-40 years, during which they will not lose any generating capacity. Almost every part of nuclear plant can be replaced except the actual reactor vessel. Because of this, nuclear plants have a much longer life span than designed. They are issued licenses for 10 years of operation and every 10 years must be re-evaluated by a safety commission to get a new license. The plants themselves are designed to withstand extreme weather and physical attack. The generation plants can be upgraded to new and better generators and more efficient turbines as they are developed.
To me, it seems that this study only addresses initial cost. It does not seem to address total cost of ownership over the lifetime of the plant/farm.