Well, it's more the case of small error - don't allow user to continue until error is fixed, medium error - don't allow user to continue until error is fixed, huge error - don't allow user to continue until error is fixed.
It's not an error. Errors prevent you from continuing. The only thing approaching an error is the little box telling you there's a problem. That is solved by the user clicking "OK".
The entire way errors are handled is wrong. I don't know what the solution is but I very much doubt it's a simple modification to the current fundamentally flawed system.
Okay, 2010 was flagged as a leap year (which seems odd - I'd have thought you'd just want to check if the year is a multiple of 4, and you're good until 2100). Why didn't it just report to day as the 29th February?
And why doesn't the workaround of setting the date to 1st Jan 2010 or 1st March 2010 work? What is causing the date to reset? surely this is just a number read from a real time clock.
The main problem is that corruption is tricky. Direct bribes are likely to be undercover journalists. Campaign spending is limited so offering that is not going to get you far. Even if you do find a way to bribe them, MEPs are paid extremely well, and you need to get to a lot of them to get the law changed. The bureaucrats will need a huge bribe because they have an extremely cushy job and good pension plan that they don't want to risk throwing away.
Seems like a stupid list with no legitimacy. Honestly, it seems like a petty schoolgirl's list of "people I don't like", where countries get put on it for completely arbitrary reasons.
Oh, I don't think there's an innocent explanation. I'm still open to the possibility that there's a slightly less fundamentally wrong behaviour explanation. The school may be waiting for the actual trial before giving their innocent explanation.
Even watching a random selection would seem a bit of a crapshoot. If the kids decide to turn off their computers or do all their illegal activity in a different room or off camera they'll get nothing.
We don't actually know for sure whether the school did anything wrong. There's a hell of a lot of speculation in the complaint, and this is just a preliminary ruling.
Fact is, it doesn't make sense for the school to be spying on anyone. That's 1200 students to spy on in the hope that they might catch one of them doing something naughty. Why would the school do this?
There are all sorts of ways that the school could have got the photo through reasonably legitimate means. The suit alleges and speculates one way that is technically possible but it's just an allegation at the moment. We need to wait for a full trial before we find out whether the school did what was alleged, and to determine the punishment if they did.
Yes, but treaties seem to be a way around this. Governments don't need public approval for treaties. The treaties just obligate them to make appropriate laws. The public can have input into the laws after the treaty is signed but have considerably less say over it.
Of course, the US (presumably other countries) often avoids treaty obligations because the constitution makes it impossible to write laws.
Not totally convinced by the argument that flight was a cost reduction thing for the animated series though. This was pretty high quality work, and flying would mean they couldn't use the rotoscoping technique they used for most of the animation.
It seems unlikely that the school would have the ability to spy on people like this. It's ludicrous to think that they would. Teachers have better things to do with their time than watch hundreds of kids who might be doing something wrong, and they'd have to be complete idiots not to realise the potential for child porn allegations.
The complaints are all from the plaintiffs who may be making completely unwarranted assumptions. These are just complaints. Not findings of fact.
Okay. Thomas Jefferson said some pretty moronic things. Being Thomas Jefferson doesn't make him right. That fallacy even has a name: argument from authority (argumentum ad verecundiam)
Right now the British government is terrified of its population. As a result, our ability to protest has been curtailed, the police have been given unprecedented powers and the government has desperately tried to push an ID card scheme. I don't fear the government, but I certainly don't feel at liberty.
You don't want those with power to be frightened. Who do you think the most frightened person in a bank robbery is? It's the guy with the gun. Anything could go wrong. If it becomes a hostage situation, one of the most important things is to keep the guy calm. You don't want the guy with the power to be frightened.
When government fears the people there is a ineffectual weak populist government that fears making difficult decisions because people collectively are pretty damn stupid. Alas that isn't catchy and doesn't use a clever mechanic of opposites, but alas, reality can't always be handled in a pithy statement.
Government should respect the people, earn their trust, and work as their loyal servants. Neither side should fear the other.
If I hire a web developer, I'm going to force him to not exclude 12% of my potential customer base. Small values of force perhaps but the threat of not being kept on is certainly pressure of sorts.
But so are lots of other fingerprints. Most of the coffee cups I use have no way to associate them with me unless someone's actually spying on me.
A recording of your fingerprints associates the fingerprint with a specific person on a database.
Honestly I doubt it matters. These things aren't that reliable and I wouldn't be surprised if there were a lot of false positives for a given fingerprint.
What are the best aerodynamics? How can we make a vehicle smaller and lighter? Assuming we've optimised the aerodynamics and weight, how can we make the engine even more efficient? We'll get some useful research from this, a lot of which will scale up even to make a truck more fuel efficient.
Oh come on. If you want a basic understanding of a subject, Wikipedia is fine. I've used it to get a basic summary of the breakup of Yugoslavia, find out where certain countries are, found out about different blood type systems... Were I a UN official, planning on invading a country or a doctor I'd use a more credible source for each of these, but I'm not. Even then, I'd possibly use it as a starting point. The references are pretty useful.
Common knowledge is usually WRONG.
It's common knowledge that you will starve to death if you don't eat, tat you should sleep when tired, that cars are a popular means of transportation, that windows are transparent, that stained glass windows are common in European churches, fruit contains sugar... Is all this wrong? It's all common knowledge.
More to the point, where is Wikipedia wrong? People often criticise it but the worst that can be said is that it doesn't go into deep analysis of its topics. Nor should it - it's an encyclopedia.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, it's more the case of small error - don't allow user to continue until error is fixed, medium error - don't allow user to continue until error is fixed, huge error - don't allow user to continue until error is fixed.
It's not an error. Errors prevent you from continuing. The only thing approaching an error is the little box telling you there's a problem. That is solved by the user clicking "OK".
The entire way errors are handled is wrong. I don't know what the solution is but I very much doubt it's a simple modification to the current fundamentally flawed system.
Okay, 2010 was flagged as a leap year (which seems odd - I'd have thought you'd just want to check if the year is a multiple of 4, and you're good until 2100). Why didn't it just report to day as the 29th February?
And why doesn't the workaround of setting the date to 1st Jan 2010 or 1st March 2010 work? What is causing the date to reset? surely this is just a number read from a real time clock.
The main problem is that corruption is tricky. Direct bribes are likely to be undercover journalists. Campaign spending is limited so offering that is not going to get you far. Even if you do find a way to bribe them, MEPs are paid extremely well, and you need to get to a lot of them to get the law changed. The bureaucrats will need a huge bribe because they have an extremely cushy job and good pension plan that they don't want to risk throwing away.
Seems like a stupid list with no legitimacy. Honestly, it seems like a petty schoolgirl's list of "people I don't like", where countries get put on it for completely arbitrary reasons.
Oh, I don't think there's an innocent explanation. I'm still open to the possibility that there's a slightly less fundamentally wrong behaviour explanation. The school may be waiting for the actual trial before giving their innocent explanation.
Even watching a random selection would seem a bit of a crapshoot. If the kids decide to turn off their computers or do all their illegal activity in a different room or off camera they'll get nothing.
Ultimately what the ruling says is that YouTube is illegal.
Google's only option is to have a service that gets explicit permission from anyone featured in the video before posting.
We don't actually know for sure whether the school did anything wrong. There's a hell of a lot of speculation in the complaint, and this is just a preliminary ruling.
Fact is, it doesn't make sense for the school to be spying on anyone. That's 1200 students to spy on in the hope that they might catch one of them doing something naughty. Why would the school do this?
There are all sorts of ways that the school could have got the photo through reasonably legitimate means. The suit alleges and speculates one way that is technically possible but it's just an allegation at the moment. We need to wait for a full trial before we find out whether the school did what was alleged, and to determine the punishment if they did.
Yes, but treaties seem to be a way around this. Governments don't need public approval for treaties. The treaties just obligate them to make appropriate laws. The public can have input into the laws after the treaty is signed but have considerably less say over it.
Of course, the US (presumably other countries) often avoids treaty obligations because the constitution makes it impossible to write laws.
You're absolutely right. Well, presumably he had the retconned ability to fly at the time.
Not totally convinced by the argument that flight was a cost reduction thing for the animated series though. This was pretty high quality work, and flying would mean they couldn't use the rotoscoping technique they used for most of the animation.
There's something we're not being told here.
It seems unlikely that the school would have the ability to spy on people like this. It's ludicrous to think that they would. Teachers have better things to do with their time than watch hundreds of kids who might be doing something wrong, and they'd have to be complete idiots not to realise the potential for child porn allegations.
The complaints are all from the plaintiffs who may be making completely unwarranted assumptions. These are just complaints. Not findings of fact.
Okay. Not sure what you're afraid of though.
I'm quite willing to accept that the quote may make more sense in context. I'm certainly not going to accept it on its own merits.
Okay. Thomas Jefferson said some pretty moronic things. Being Thomas Jefferson doesn't make him right. That fallacy even has a name: argument from authority (argumentum ad verecundiam)
Right now the British government is terrified of its population. As a result, our ability to protest has been curtailed, the police have been given unprecedented powers and the government has desperately tried to push an ID card scheme. I don't fear the government, but I certainly don't feel at liberty.
You don't want those with power to be frightened. Who do you think the most frightened person in a bank robbery is? It's the guy with the gun. Anything could go wrong. If it becomes a hostage situation, one of the most important things is to keep the guy calm. You don't want the guy with the power to be frightened.
The much wiser man was a complete moron then.
When government fears the people there is a ineffectual weak populist government that fears making difficult decisions because people collectively are pretty damn stupid. Alas that isn't catchy and doesn't use a clever mechanic of opposites, but alas, reality can't always be handled in a pithy statement.
Government should respect the people, earn their trust, and work as their loyal servants. Neither side should fear the other.
If I hire a web developer, I'm going to force him to not exclude 12% of my potential customer base. Small values of force perhaps but the threat of not being kept on is certainly pressure of sorts.
But so are lots of other fingerprints. Most of the coffee cups I use have no way to associate them with me unless someone's actually spying on me.
A recording of your fingerprints associates the fingerprint with a specific person on a database.
Honestly I doubt it matters. These things aren't that reliable and I wouldn't be surprised if there were a lot of false positives for a given fingerprint.
Because a card or money is "too hard".
Or more likely, more easily stolen.
What are the best aerodynamics? How can we make a vehicle smaller and lighter? Assuming we've optimised the aerodynamics and weight, how can we make the engine even more efficient? We'll get some useful research from this, a lot of which will scale up even to make a truck more fuel efficient.
Oh come on. If you want a basic understanding of a subject, Wikipedia is fine. I've used it to get a basic summary of the breakup of Yugoslavia, find out where certain countries are, found out about different blood type systems... Were I a UN official, planning on invading a country or a doctor I'd use a more credible source for each of these, but I'm not. Even then, I'd possibly use it as a starting point. The references are pretty useful.
Common knowledge is usually WRONG.
It's common knowledge that you will starve to death if you don't eat, tat you should sleep when tired, that cars are a popular means of transportation, that windows are transparent, that stained glass windows are common in European churches, fruit contains sugar... Is all this wrong? It's all common knowledge.
More to the point, where is Wikipedia wrong? People often criticise it but the worst that can be said is that it doesn't go into deep analysis of its topics. Nor should it - it's an encyclopedia.
Uhm... very few digital sources rely on closed caption. DVDs have their own subtitle mechanism. Few VHS players have a digital output.
Doh! I mean if the anti-piracy mechanisms went away...
Ok, queue up the haters, I don't give a shit what any of you think.
Well, I appreciate your honesty. There's no suggestion that you'd switch back to paying for stuff if the piracy went away.
Why not? It sounds at least as good as any other cheap touchscreen phone at a quarter of the price.
I and several hundred other people would each like to sublet a square foot of your shop:) Hell, doing it this way the overheads would be negligible.
I'm already not buying one because they're all region coded. This isn't going to affect my purchasing decision at all.