Don't think that many people care about 4k content.
The rental prices are daft. Also rentals make things confusing if you have Prime. I don't want to pay per item.
They have a couple of exclusives that look interesting though, I quite enjoyed The Man In The High Castle. And getting Amazon prime delivery is a nice perk.
Chip-and-PIN is not a new idea! We've had it for over a decade in Britain and we weren't the first to implement it! One of the reasons the banks pushed it here was because other countries that have tried it saw substantial reductions in fraud!
Chocolate teapots have their uses. Main one is that if you're hungry you could eat it. Also, these guys would have it that you can even use one for brewing tea
A 3D printed clock though - plenty of examples. Usually using other materials for the pendulum, but I imagine nowhere near as consistent or useful at sea as Harrison's clocks.
That depends entirely on how much safer and/or faster a journey is thanks to the clock, as well as the lifetime (and maintenance cost) of the clock,
It does indeed.
How long does a precision instrument that needs to keep perfect time last in conditions of wildly varying temperatures, high humidity and high chance of contact with saltwater? Larcum Kendall made a replica of H4 but he argued that it was too expensive for general use.
It's not unreasonable to wait for the claimed advantages to be tested and verified before paying out a hefty prize, after all. After others had demonstrated that the watch could be made more cheaply, then it's quite clear that Harrison deserved the award.
It was expensive, but not too expensive. Ships were also expensive. Entire fleets of warships and the upkeep of the sailors and marines even more so.
Yes, but when a quarter of the price of the ship is the clock, I'd say there's an argument that costs need to be reduced before it's really "practical".
True, but if you see a silver Aston Martin DB5 you immediately think of James Bond, and would that red stripe be enough to violate the copyright on the A-Team van?
There are of course always edge cases. I just wonder how these things would go if challenged.
Curiously, in a similar case, despite the vehicle in question being an unmodified creation of the Met Police, the rights to the Blue Police Box now belong to the BBC.
Ecto-1 especially. It's just a paint-job on an old Cadillac ambulance, with a bunch of crap on the roof. Is the crap on the roof copyrightable? I guess the "No Ghosts" logo is.
It's kind of like E=m c^2... if I hit you with mass (e.g., my fist), that's assault. If I hit you with energy (e.g., the reflected light off of my face), that's expected. There might be some limit that is in between the two extremes. Since the whole concept is rather modern, no one really knows where to put that limit.
No, but since 128 bits is considered a universally unique identifier and most copyrighted data is substantially longer than that.
But the law doesn't care about pure mathematics. It cares more about intent. If, through a purely mathematical process, accidentally managed to stumble on a number, that by coincidence was an ISO of The Little Mermaid, then as long as you could show that this was a coincidence you would not be in breach of copyright.
Except the ones and zeroes aren't what's copyrighted. A completely different representation of the data that shares no mathematical relationship will be covered by the same copyright.
The size of these numbers is ludicrous. The odds against anyone independently wanting to use any of them independently if the copyrighted work for mathematical purposes will be ludicrously unlikely to happen within the lifetime of the universe. Like, if you think this is a problem, you'll also worry about spontaneous nuclear explosions of nearby objects.
What non-contrived mathematical purpose have you been prevented from doing due to being unable to use these numbers? The only things I could imagine are enjoying the creative works of another person's imagination.
Yeah. The second paragraph was my musing. Should have made that clearer.
My thinking is that the judge said "could" here. Unless there was really strong evidence that it was authorised by the Hill Sisters, I'd imagine the judge err-ing on the side of the Copyright holder since depriving someone of their copyright on what amounts to a minor procedural error would seem pretty unfair. The law is meant to be more neutral than that, but that's an ideal that tends not to be met in practice.
That's a legal argument that the plaintiffs made. The judge denied that one.
Since the publisher was not the copyright holder, and only the licensee, it's unlikely that he had the right to put it in the public domain. It's not even certain that Summy Co. had the right to it at that point in order to license it in the first place.
Well, as Taco mentioned at the time, the original iPod did have less space than a nomad and no wireless (so I presume competitors did have this).
Mind you, I do think that the 3rd gen iPod mini was an absolutely lovely piece of kit. Damn expensive though and not that much better than the Sansa fuze.
Game devs don't really care. They'll use the API they have.
nVidia is (I believe) a Khronos founding member. They've always supported and contributed to DX and OpenGL.
DX survives because MS pushes it. They're the 800b gorilla with a monopoly over PC gamer operating systems and a strong share in the console market with the XBox One.
I do agree with your second paragraph, just have an issue with these stock phrases people use to label and thus discredit views they disagree with. I think it's the antithesis of discussion.
Turing's idea on intelligence was an interesting early thought about what we mean by "intelligence", but I think, rather than proving we've produced intelligent machines, these chatbots illustrate that it's more complicated than that.
However the brain works, I think it very unlikely that it simply selects a best possible answer from a database. And looking at transcripts from these things, they're really not actually communicating much information. The most convincing answers always seem to be the least helpful ones.
If everyone is given a basic living income then the relative benefits of another kid are lower.
But I do agree. You'd probably want to ramp up the income over the first few years, and then transfer it to the child between about 16 and 18 years old.
Fun fact 1 - some people do want to switch to iPhone. No idea why. Maybe they think the iPhone is cooler. Maybe there's something specific about it that isn't available on Android. Whatever the case, they are entitled to their decision.
Fun fact 2 - people who want to switch want to transfer their email, photos and other data. This app helps. Or maybe it doesn't. It's impossible to know because of the idiots giving one-star reviews.
All the one-star reviews are from angry android fans who have no desire to transfer so aren't going to find it remotely useful. No kidding! How about letting other people make that choice though? Do these same people trawl through Google play looking for other apps that they have no use for? "Fishing app - I hate fishing. 1 star. French dictionary? I'm learning German - 1 star!"
So all the idiots supporting "choice" - you're actually reducing it!
I think you're taking a figure of speech a bit too literally here.
While it's possible that he made a solemn oath to a deity or figure of authority, I think it's more likely he's simply decided never to do so again, with the journalist deciding "vow" is a better word.
From the article: "The teacher kept the clock. When the principal and a police officer pulled Ahmed out of sixth period, he suspected he wouldnâ(TM)t get it back."
If it really was a bomb, then it still would have gone off, and killed that teacher and anyone nearby.
Slashdot Mirror
Don't think that many people care about 4k content.
The rental prices are daft. Also rentals make things confusing if you have Prime. I don't want to pay per item.
They have a couple of exclusives that look interesting though, I quite enjoyed The Man In The High Castle. And getting Amazon prime delivery is a nice perk.
Chip-and-PIN is not a new idea! We've had it for over a decade in Britain and we weren't the first to implement it! One of the reasons the banks pushed it here was because other countries that have tried it saw substantial reductions in fraud!
It works!
Because you didn't invest in the right tech companies!
Chocolate teapots have their uses. Main one is that if you're hungry you could eat it. Also, these guys would have it that you can even use one for brewing tea
A 3D printed clock though - plenty of examples. Usually using other materials for the pendulum, but I imagine nowhere near as consistent or useful at sea as Harrison's clocks.
It does indeed.
How long does a precision instrument that needs to keep perfect time last in conditions of wildly varying temperatures, high humidity and high chance of contact with saltwater? Larcum Kendall made a replica of H4 but he argued that it was too expensive for general use.
It's not unreasonable to wait for the claimed advantages to be tested and verified before paying out a hefty prize, after all. After others had demonstrated that the watch could be made more cheaply, then it's quite clear that Harrison deserved the award.
Yes, but when a quarter of the price of the ship is the clock, I'd say there's an argument that costs need to be reduced before it's really "practical".
True, but if you see a silver Aston Martin DB5 you immediately think of James Bond, and would that red stripe be enough to violate the copyright on the A-Team van?
There are of course always edge cases. I just wonder how these things would go if challenged.
Curiously, in a similar case, despite the vehicle in question being an unmodified creation of the Met Police, the rights to the Blue Police Box now belong to the BBC.
Ecto-1 especially. It's just a paint-job on an old Cadillac ambulance, with a bunch of crap on the roof. Is the crap on the roof copyrightable? I guess the "No Ghosts" logo is.
No, but since 128 bits is considered a universally unique identifier and most copyrighted data is substantially longer than that.
But the law doesn't care about pure mathematics. It cares more about intent. If, through a purely mathematical process, accidentally managed to stumble on a number, that by coincidence was an ISO of The Little Mermaid, then as long as you could show that this was a coincidence you would not be in breach of copyright.
Except the ones and zeroes aren't what's copyrighted. A completely different representation of the data that shares no mathematical relationship will be covered by the same copyright.
The size of these numbers is ludicrous. The odds against anyone independently wanting to use any of them independently if the copyrighted work for mathematical purposes will be ludicrously unlikely to happen within the lifetime of the universe. Like, if you think this is a problem, you'll also worry about spontaneous nuclear explosions of nearby objects.
What non-contrived mathematical purpose have you been prevented from doing due to being unable to use these numbers? The only things I could imagine are enjoying the creative works of another person's imagination.
Well, on ebay, some of them are going for more than they cost new. On the whole, they're broadly the same price as a third gen iPod.
Yeah. The second paragraph was my musing. Should have made that clearer.
My thinking is that the judge said "could" here. Unless there was really strong evidence that it was authorised by the Hill Sisters, I'd imagine the judge err-ing on the side of the Copyright holder since depriving someone of their copyright on what amounts to a minor procedural error would seem pretty unfair. The law is meant to be more neutral than that, but that's an ideal that tends not to be met in practice.
That's a legal argument that the plaintiffs made. The judge denied that one.
Since the publisher was not the copyright holder, and only the licensee, it's unlikely that he had the right to put it in the public domain. It's not even certain that Summy Co. had the right to it at that point in order to license it in the first place.
Well, as Taco mentioned at the time, the original iPod did have less space than a nomad and no wireless (so I presume competitors did have this).
Mind you, I do think that the 3rd gen iPod mini was an absolutely lovely piece of kit. Damn expensive though and not that much better than the Sansa fuze.
Game devs don't really care. They'll use the API they have.
nVidia is (I believe) a Khronos founding member. They've always supported and contributed to DX and OpenGL.
DX survives because MS pushes it. They're the 800b gorilla with a monopoly over PC gamer operating systems and a strong share in the console market with the XBox One.
I do agree with your second paragraph, just have an issue with these stock phrases people use to label and thus discredit views they disagree with. I think it's the antithesis of discussion.
Yay for thought terminating cliches!
Yes, two can play at that game.
Would it be possible to somehow get through with very careful drilling? Is there such a thing as a non metallic drill bit perhaps?
Given the time limit, they were certainly better off evacuating the place.
Not sure whether the "never pay" attitude is the right one but I can see the game theory justification.
Turing's idea on intelligence was an interesting early thought about what we mean by "intelligence", but I think, rather than proving we've produced intelligent machines, these chatbots illustrate that it's more complicated than that.
However the brain works, I think it very unlikely that it simply selects a best possible answer from a database. And looking at transcripts from these things, they're really not actually communicating much information. The most convincing answers always seem to be the least helpful ones.
Is there an actual human in there for comparison?
I'm sure I am intelligent enough, but I'm way too lazy.
If everyone is given a basic living income then the relative benefits of another kid are lower.
But I do agree. You'd probably want to ramp up the income over the first few years, and then transfer it to the child between about 16 and 18 years old.
Fun fact 1 - some people do want to switch to iPhone. No idea why. Maybe they think the iPhone is cooler. Maybe there's something specific about it that isn't available on Android. Whatever the case, they are entitled to their decision.
Fun fact 2 - people who want to switch want to transfer their email, photos and other data. This app helps. Or maybe it doesn't. It's impossible to know because of the idiots giving one-star reviews.
All the one-star reviews are from angry android fans who have no desire to transfer so aren't going to find it remotely useful. No kidding! How about letting other people make that choice though? Do these same people trawl through Google play looking for other apps that they have no use for? "Fishing app - I hate fishing. 1 star. French dictionary? I'm learning German - 1 star!"
So all the idiots supporting "choice" - you're actually reducing it!
I think you're taking a figure of speech a bit too literally here.
While it's possible that he made a solemn oath to a deity or figure of authority, I think it's more likely he's simply decided never to do so again, with the journalist deciding "vow" is a better word.
From the article: "The teacher kept the clock. When the principal and a police officer pulled Ahmed out of sixth period, he suspected he wouldnâ(TM)t get it back."
If it really was a bomb, then it still would have gone off, and killed that teacher and anyone nearby.