But the only "law" is that the number of transistors doubles in a certain time (something of a self fulfilling prophesy these days since this is the yardstick the chip companies work to).
Once transistors get below a certain size, of course it will end. Parallel or serial doesn't change things. We either have more processors in the same space, more complex processors or simply smaller processors. There's no "saving" to be done.
That way you get a good phone with a good OS, but you then need to persuade developers that they want to develop for it. People don't give a damn about the OS. That's why the iPhone doesn't multitask, and MS-DOS was acceptable on the PC for so long. They just want the apps.
But without an agreement, you simply aren't legally allowed to use the feature. It's patented and you need a licence to use it. The manufacturer have sorted out permission for non commercial use and mention the limitations in the manual. It would be equivalent to a CD burner stating that it's not licensed to stamp out hundreds of copies of copyrighted CDs without the rightholder's permission.
You legally need explicit permission from the patent holders to use the CODEC for any purpose. The manufacturer made an agreement that unilaterally grants you non commercial rights but the rights are limited.
If you use it commercially the manufacturer doesn't give a damn, but the patent holders can sue you.
MPEG-LA has insinuated in the past that they own so many patents around mpeg2 and h.264, that is simply not possible to build a video codec that it doesn't infringe on their patents.
This is blatant rubbish. A full MPEG 1 implementation can be implemented since all patents relating to that have expired. A number of the MPEG2 patents have expired so it may be possible to extend this using those. So that gives at the very least some basic space conversion and final compression algorithms that can be used. Even a few of the MPEG 2 patents have expired. We're not looking at a particularly modern CODEC yet, but this should at least give us better quality than an MJPEG stream.
It's not that simple. There are probably going to be a few hiccups and Cameron is pretty knowledgable on the technical aspects. There may well be an aspect of "Hey, jim, we've got this problem with the 3D cameras in these circumstances. How did you deal with this in avatar?"
Yes, but balance of probabilities - there's at least some reason to believe that he might flee.
A geek who just lost his job going to Vegas with a wodge of cash is also quite explainable (he might want to make money counting cards - perfectly legal) but how much are you willing to bet that he's not planning to run? What odds would you give?
There does seem to be a certain mistrust of video game design courses. A lot of employers thing that kids just go into them because they figure game development is an easy glamorous job that involves playing games all day. Ads about tightening graphics don't help with this image.
There was potential harm. Something could have happened and nobody would have been able to fix it.
Since it was only potential harm, I don't think this does deserve a prison sentence, and I hope he doesn't suffer too great a punishment. I'd even like to see him get another job. That's partly out of sympathy for him, but he has useful skills and in an environment where they're simply more used to this personality type (most tech companies should be able to work with him), he should be a beneficial employee.
In the EU, the contract is with the retailer. If the product is faulty it's then up to the retailer and manufacturer to sort it out.
The customer has the right to ask the manufacturer to fix it of course, and the retailer may suggest that they do (they often will if something is covered by the warranty), but if the customer insists then it's up to the retailer to sort things out.
It will give very limited rights. However, I suspect it would allow them to make reasonable changes if things were unclear, or if a clause was found to be invalid, or if the law changes.
If the EULA was changed to be clearly in the favour of the other party I doubt there would be any complaint. Not going to happen though.
The point is this makes the parents' job that little bit easier, so more parents are going to ensure that their children eat more healthily, so the overall obesity rates will go down. Obesity does actually cause problems for all society.
They wanted to get the legislation passed before parliament was dissolved before the election.
Not quite sure why they did this. There was strong support from the Conservative party who are the most likely alternative party to be in power so the legislation or suitably similar legislation was likely to be passed. The best possible explanation is that special interest groups such as those who actually use the internet might have had time to mobilise.
Surely teams of experts would have been consulted, and this would have been debated several times in several houses, with considerable thought put into the criticisms of those opposing it! The only way we could have all these silly loopholes is if it was somehow rushed. But why would the government ever do that with such important legislation?
Slashdot Mirror
But the only "law" is that the number of transistors doubles in a certain time (something of a self fulfilling prophesy these days since this is the yardstick the chip companies work to).
Once transistors get below a certain size, of course it will end. Parallel or serial doesn't change things. We either have more processors in the same space, more complex processors or simply smaller processors. There's no "saving" to be done.
why would a "good" developer need persuading to develop for a "good" phone with a "good" OS?
Because they want to make money. If only a handful of people own this phone then who will by your app?
That way you get a good phone with a good OS, but you then need to persuade developers that they want to develop for it. People don't give a damn about the OS. That's why the iPhone doesn't multitask, and MS-DOS was acceptable on the PC for so long. They just want the apps.
But without an agreement, you simply aren't legally allowed to use the feature. It's patented and you need a licence to use it. The manufacturer have sorted out permission for non commercial use and mention the limitations in the manual. It would be equivalent to a CD burner stating that it's not licensed to stamp out hundreds of copies of copyrighted CDs without the rightholder's permission.
Not quite. The diameter of the earth is a few hundred feet out at that precision. The milky Way diameter is millions of miles out.
You legally need explicit permission from the patent holders to use the CODEC for any purpose. The manufacturer made an agreement that unilaterally grants you non commercial rights but the rights are limited.
If you use it commercially the manufacturer doesn't give a damn, but the patent holders can sue you.
MPEG-LA has insinuated in the past that they own so many patents around mpeg2 and h.264, that is simply not possible to build a video codec that it doesn't infringe on their patents.
This is blatant rubbish. A full MPEG 1 implementation can be implemented since all patents relating to that have expired. A number of the MPEG2 patents have expired so it may be possible to extend this using those. So that gives at the very least some basic space conversion and final compression algorithms that can be used. Even a few of the MPEG 2 patents have expired. We're not looking at a particularly modern CODEC yet, but this should at least give us better quality than an MJPEG stream.
It's not that simple. There are probably going to be a few hiccups and Cameron is pretty knowledgable on the technical aspects. There may well be an aspect of "Hey, jim, we've got this problem with the 3D cameras in these circumstances. How did you deal with this in avatar?"
Assuming we're talking about comedies that are somehow geek related and aren't sci-fi, would be Spaced.
That so many people seem to think there's some sort of objective measure for what is and isn't funny.
Some people like it. Some people don't.
Actually he probably does.
He is extremely well read on physics. He did develop a lot of the technology himself.
Yes, but balance of probabilities - there's at least some reason to believe that he might flee.
A geek who just lost his job going to Vegas with a wodge of cash is also quite explainable (he might want to make money counting cards - perfectly legal) but how much are you willing to bet that he's not planning to run? What odds would you give?
There does seem to be a certain mistrust of video game design courses. A lot of employers thing that kids just go into them because they figure game development is an easy glamorous job that involves playing games all day. Ads about tightening graphics don't help with this image.
LOL! Nothing you can do will stop us nitpickers:)
There was potential harm. Something could have happened and nobody would have been able to fix it.
Since it was only potential harm, I don't think this does deserve a prison sentence, and I hope he doesn't suffer too great a punishment. I'd even like to see him get another job. That's partly out of sympathy for him, but he has useful skills and in an environment where they're simply more used to this personality type (most tech companies should be able to work with him), he should be a beneficial employee.
This is much more like a bios update for a PC with no expansion slots that makes you choose between Internet access & being able to run Linux.
Uhm... Isn't that exactly what they did rather than just "like" what they did?
LOL!
But I think the point is that some countries spell certain words one way, and others spell them another, and neither is right or wrong.
Hope the self important imperialism is working out for you. Have to say it does give us a sense of parental pride.
In the EU, the contract is with the retailer. If the product is faulty it's then up to the retailer and manufacturer to sort it out.
The customer has the right to ask the manufacturer to fix it of course, and the retailer may suggest that they do (they often will if something is covered by the warranty), but if the customer insists then it's up to the retailer to sort things out.
"No it wasn't. There was no such limitation".
"blah blah blah"
"No, absolute contradiction"
Doesn't work if they have a copy of the same playbook as you but repeated contradiction does have better odds of success as trying to be reasonable.
It will give very limited rights. However, I suspect it would allow them to make reasonable changes if things were unclear, or if a clause was found to be invalid, or if the law changes.
If the EULA was changed to be clearly in the favour of the other party I doubt there would be any complaint. Not going to happen though.
"No it doesn't work. It was clearly indicated that it runs Linux. It does not run Linux. Therefore it doesn't work."
That said, I agree with your point. Negotiations with the stupid or stubborn can be tricky. You need to anticipate what they say and contradict them.
The point is this makes the parents' job that little bit easier, so more parents are going to ensure that their children eat more healthily, so the overall obesity rates will go down. Obesity does actually cause problems for all society.
They managed before. They should be able to manage it still.
They wanted to get the legislation passed before parliament was dissolved before the election.
Not quite sure why they did this. There was strong support from the Conservative party who are the most likely alternative party to be in power so the legislation or suitably similar legislation was likely to be passed. The best possible explanation is that special interest groups such as those who actually use the internet might have had time to mobilise.
Surely teams of experts would have been consulted, and this would have been debated several times in several houses, with considerable thought put into the criticisms of those opposing it! The only way we could have all these silly loopholes is if it was somehow rushed. But why would the government ever do that with such important legislation?