Wait - you mean that NOBODY in the police department has an iDevice or a mac? You can do the "find your iPhone" from ANY iDevice - just borrow the chief's wife's phone, click on the app, put in your Apple ID and pwd, and it comes right up. You could argue that Apple is untrustworthy, but there's no reason to believe that Apple is involved in maintaining your ruse so you can have the cops bust in on your ex's boyfriend.
What part of GPS location does the police department not understand?
The security is in line with the cargo value. While you may be carrying the nuclear codes on your iPhone, the average consumer is not, and the most important thing being protected is having their facebook status pranked by a roommate. Security and convenience are mutually exclusive, and I'll give you three guesses which one matters the most to consumers.
He did, but if AT&T had reason to know that he was and didn't do anything about it, they're on shakier ground. Yes, there's a clause in the contract that covers that, but there's a lot of case law which may supercede the clause and invalidate it.
No, they can't, or they would then be charged with traffiking in circumvention devices. Of course, each individual may learn to program and keep their own software updated, but they can't share it with anyone else. It's like saying your free to make a phone call, and then covering your mouth with duct tape. You're still allowed to make a call.
It is true that this chapter of the law does not grant fair use rights, but it is part of Title 17 (Chpt 1201 to be exact), not a standalone title.
The summary provided by the US Copyright Office attempts to address this condition, and utterly fails:
"This distinction [between unauthorized access and unauthorized copying] was employed to assure that the public will have the continued ability to make fair use of copyrighted works. Since copying of a work may be a fair use under appropriate circumstances, section 1201 does not prohibit the act of circumventing a technological measure that prevents copying. By contrast, since the fair use doctrine is not a defense to the act of gaining unauthorized access to a work, the act of circumventing a technological measure in order to gain access is prohibited"
The problems is that since there is no mechanism for the CCA to grant copy authority, copying for fair use by the public requires that "unauthorized" access be granted. This isn't like the DAT recorders which implemented copy once which allowed fair use copies. Without access, no mechanism short of access to the material is available to the public to make a fair use copy. The law makes it impossible to obtain the method from anyone else. It's a key flaw in the logic of the text, and one that has, afaik, not been tested, at least in part because nobody who has a business model based on removing CCA has enough money to do so.
The right given in Title 17 is, therefore, made illusory by the law itself. I don't know how the courts view language in a law versus an interpretation of an illusory right in a contract, but there is a certain parity to the conditions.
This is one of the areas that the DMCA creates an illusory right. The law specifically states that the right to fair use, which includes time and format shifting, is not to be affected by the law. The law also prohibits anyone from assisting in removing copy protection.
The key is that the ability to remove the protection for fair use _must_ be available and reasonable for the average person who has paid for the product, or the right to format shift in accordance with fair use doctrine is purely illusory. This is pretty common, and when it comes up in contract law, it's pretty straightforward - you can't give illusory rights.
IA(of course)NAL, and even lawyers will disagree, but the law explicitly states a right (fair use) that is not to be altered, and then effectively alters that right by making it illegal for nearly everyone to obtain access to it.
I would like to see the law struck down - or at least the traffiking in copy protection removal devices and software removed for any fair use right, including personal use.
I like my iPad1, though it's sluggish. I am (too) anxiously awaiting two new iPads due this Friday. I even kept the running commentary on the announcement up in a browser window (yes, I felt a bit dirty afterward). When I heard the proclamation of the speed difference, that certainly seemed to imply a 4-core processing using. At least, that was in the realm of possibility (4 CPU cores and 4 GPU cores vs the Tegra). I'm not convinced now that the claim is valid except for very special conditions with a host of caveats (using 2 CPU + 4 GPU to calculate GPU-assisted functions vs the 4 core Tegra CPU alone).
I agree 100% with your sentiment - and the responsiveness of the UI makes up for a lot of computational shortcomings in iOS devices. In fact, because the devices aren't meant for computationally intensive processes (protein folding, CFD/FEM analysis, bulk media recoding, etc.) the speed of the processor only needs to be fast enough not to be a hindrance to the use flow. Almost all of the media processing is so limited in format on iOS devices that encode/decode can be HW accelerated, precluding the need to do the killer ops in software. So, it may not matter how fast the A5X is, as long as it is "fast enough." Anything faster than real time won't matter to the user as long as it's real time ALL the time. But you can't just go make up numbers.
No, I didn't. The cool thing is that I don't have to. If it comes to my phone, it gets delivered via my Google Voice number as a text message (or to iMessage if someone iMessages my email address). It goes to my wife's textfree number (or, again, via iMessage if someone uses her email address). My daughter's itouch gets iMessage no matter what.
It's one of those things that "just works" and if it had come around earlier I wouldn't have had to get a text free or google voice number to get free sms on my phone.
Might as well buy a lottery ticket. Most of the really keen folks who would come up with the next new widget and make a million dollars are already making their mark in other fields. Somewhere they're a smart kid out of work that will take a chance on this job, and come up with something cool. He's one in a thousand. Actually there are a hundred of him out there, in fact. And one of those hundred will make it to the American Dream stage. The other ninety-nine thousand will trudge through with $40k a year until the find another job or retire.
Capitalism is depressing if you're not both innovative AND lucky. But it beats never having a chance at all.
Most on-site manual labor jobs suck no matter how you look at them. A lot of white collar jobs suck in a different way. Unless you're in the top 10% of any white collar field, your job most likely sucks, because all the really cool jobs have been taken by that 10%.
The key is most jobs suck because, hey, they're jobs. If they weren't they'd be hobbies, and you'd either love them or you'd go do something else.
"but I'd not leave my current $120K+ job in a city"
See, that's not who they're looking for. If you're making $60/hr and have a job, you're not really the ideal candidate. There are something like 15 million workers in the US who currently have near-zero income. Of those 15 million, apparently none of them are interested in this as a job, despite wages which are $20/hr more than they are currently getting paid.
I wouldn't be surprised if 80% of those people could not, for one reason or another, do this job. That only leaves 3 million. If 99% of them aren't willing or able to relocate, that still leaves 30,000 people. And yet the candidate pool doesn't even appear to be that deep.
Actually, emissions from automotive exhausts are far cleaner than the effluent from a cigarette.
Mostly unrelated, as smell is a poor indicator of exhast, but I can tell when someone is smoking in another car, often several ahead of me, in slow traffic or at a stop light. The smell of exhaust from the cars doesn't even come close to covering it up.
Actually, it does have some advantages for very shallow depth of field photography, as it can be challenging to get just the *right* focus point. This would let you post-process tweak the results. (If I had a dime for every shot that had the hair/bangs in focus but not the eyes!)
It would also allow fast photography (motion capture) with an infinite depth of field at telephoto lengths. Since you can choose the focus after the fact, it should be just a matter of a (future) photoshop plugin to combine the image planes to get optimal focus at all lengths and then combine the planes into a single image. It would be like a HDR image, but for focus. No, it's not useful in every shot - but it's an artistic choice that's not currently available for some scenes.
And what will keep these superconductors at superconducting temperatures? Or have they solved the room temperature superconducting problem? May as well say you'll use super strong cable and make a space elevator at that point.
Actually, the problem isn't getting up, it's staying up. It may only take 294MJ to get there, but in order to stay in orbit you have to be moving at 7-8km/s to do it. 1/2mV^2 = (0.5x100kgx8000m/s^2) if I got my units right = 3200MJ, which is an orders of magnitude larger, not accounting for any losses in friction or energy transfer, so it may be off by at least a factor of four more, likely more like 10. Not bad for materials with a 0.5 payload to casing ratio, but still expensive if you want to keep that flesh alive once you get there, and have a way to get back down uncooked.;-)
No, that's the same problem with just running the tube on the ground - when you exit, the pressure forces at orbital velocity will tear any vehicle apart. Build one tough enough to hold together and it will burn up from friction. Plus the losses at seal level will mean you would need far, far more speed than orbital velocity to "coast" to space.
That, of course, presumes you're willing to deal with the 16,000psi pressures, continuous immersion in salt water, and the enormous buoyant force that would come with an underwater tube.
But the biggest challenges are mudane. I did not notice any safety configuration for when the current fails and the power is no longer available to support the magnetic separation. The unpowered mode of this structure is unstable.
I suppose you could lower it each time you finished a launch, but then you have to spend the power to raise the whole thing again. I would expect they would build it on the ground and the cables would have automatic takeup/retraction (that's a lot of cable!), so it could be lowered.
WTF - a zero chance of war means 11:40pm. Shouldn't that be closer to 12:01 AM? I mean 10 minutes to midnight (when, I presume, we launch the pumpkins and somebody gets caught wearing rags instead of a ball gown) sounds a lot worse when compared to a 24 hours day than to a 20 minute window.
Actually, it means that if you don't have lots of free time, or prefer not to spend an inordinate amount of time in the game, you can still have a complete, fulfilling experience, leaving some of the drudgery time wasters behind. I means you can do more of the fun stuff with the time you spend.
Do you know how to update the bluetooth drivers on a high end Kenwood head unit? The only way to do it is via Bluetooth. So if your BT isn't working correctly, you should have it connect to a bluetooth device and do an update. Update not work and your BT is no longer operational? Just update it by connecting to the...oh shit.
I haven't had it fail, but damn it just seems ripe for problems. Of course, it's Kenwood, so nothing really works well.
Slashdot Mirror
Wait - you mean that NOBODY in the police department has an iDevice or a mac? You can do the "find your iPhone" from ANY iDevice - just borrow the chief's wife's phone, click on the app, put in your Apple ID and pwd, and it comes right up. You could argue that Apple is untrustworthy, but there's no reason to believe that Apple is involved in maintaining your ruse so you can have the cops bust in on your ex's boyfriend.
What part of GPS location does the police department not understand?
The security is in line with the cargo value. While you may be carrying the nuclear codes on your iPhone, the average consumer is not, and the most important thing being protected is having their facebook status pranked by a roommate. Security and convenience are mutually exclusive, and I'll give you three guesses which one matters the most to consumers.
He did, but if AT&T had reason to know that he was and didn't do anything about it, they're on shakier ground. Yes, there's a clause in the contract that covers that, but there's a lot of case law which may supercede the clause and invalidate it.
Yeah, this just gives them more parameters to work with so they don't make the same mistakes next time.
No, they can't, or they would then be charged with traffiking in circumvention devices. Of course, each individual may learn to program and keep their own software updated, but they can't share it with anyone else. It's like saying your free to make a phone call, and then covering your mouth with duct tape. You're still allowed to make a call.
That's a very fine point to put in it.
It is true that this chapter of the law does not grant fair use rights, but it is part of Title 17 (Chpt 1201 to be exact), not a standalone title.
The summary provided by the US Copyright Office attempts to address this condition, and utterly fails:
"This distinction [between unauthorized access and unauthorized copying] was employed to assure that the public will have the continued
ability to make fair use of copyrighted works. Since copying of a work may be a fair use under appropriate circumstances, section 1201 does not prohibit the act of circumventing a technological measure that prevents copying. By contrast, since the fair use doctrine is not a defense to the act of gaining unauthorized access to a work, the act of circumventing a technological measure in order to gain access is prohibited"
The problems is that since there is no mechanism for the CCA to grant copy authority, copying for fair use by the public requires that "unauthorized" access be granted. This isn't like the DAT recorders which implemented copy once which allowed fair use copies. Without access, no mechanism short of access to the material is available to the public to make a fair use copy. The law makes it impossible to obtain the method from anyone else. It's a key flaw in the logic of the text, and one that has, afaik, not been tested, at least in part because nobody who has a business model based on removing CCA has enough money to do so.
The right given in Title 17 is, therefore, made illusory by the law itself. I don't know how the courts view language in a law versus an interpretation of an illusory right in a contract, but there is a certain parity to the conditions.
This is one of the areas that the DMCA creates an illusory right. The law specifically states that the right to fair use, which includes time and format shifting, is not to be affected by the law. The law also prohibits anyone from assisting in removing copy protection.
The key is that the ability to remove the protection for fair use _must_ be available and reasonable for the average person who has paid for the product, or the right to format shift in accordance with fair use doctrine is purely illusory. This is pretty common, and when it comes up in contract law, it's pretty straightforward - you can't give illusory rights.
IA(of course)NAL, and even lawyers will disagree, but the law explicitly states a right (fair use) that is not to be altered, and then effectively alters that right by making it illegal for nearly everyone to obtain access to it.
I would like to see the law struck down - or at least the traffiking in copy protection removal devices and software removed for any fair use right, including personal use.
So, do they now own the meteorite (how cool!), and how much is something like that worth?
I like my iPad1, though it's sluggish. I am (too) anxiously awaiting two new iPads due this Friday. I even kept the running commentary on the announcement up in a browser window (yes, I felt a bit dirty afterward). When I heard the proclamation of the speed difference, that certainly seemed to imply a 4-core processing using. At least, that was in the realm of possibility (4 CPU cores and 4 GPU cores vs the Tegra). I'm not convinced now that the claim is valid except for very special conditions with a host of caveats (using 2 CPU + 4 GPU to calculate GPU-assisted functions vs the 4 core Tegra CPU alone).
I agree 100% with your sentiment - and the responsiveness of the UI makes up for a lot of computational shortcomings in iOS devices. In fact, because the devices aren't meant for computationally intensive processes (protein folding, CFD/FEM analysis, bulk media recoding, etc.) the speed of the processor only needs to be fast enough not to be a hindrance to the use flow. Almost all of the media processing is so limited in format on iOS devices that encode/decode can be HW accelerated, precluding the need to do the killer ops in software. So, it may not matter how fast the A5X is, as long as it is "fast enough." Anything faster than real time won't matter to the user as long as it's real time ALL the time. But you can't just go make up numbers.
No, I didn't. The cool thing is that I don't have to. If it comes to my phone, it gets delivered via my Google Voice number as a text message (or to iMessage if someone iMessages my email address). It goes to my wife's textfree number (or, again, via iMessage if someone uses her email address). My daughter's itouch gets iMessage no matter what.
It's one of those things that "just works" and if it had come around earlier I wouldn't have had to get a text free or google voice number to get free sms on my phone.
Might as well buy a lottery ticket. Most of the really keen folks who would come up with the next new widget and make a million dollars are already making their mark in other fields. Somewhere they're a smart kid out of work that will take a chance on this job, and come up with something cool. He's one in a thousand. Actually there are a hundred of him out there, in fact. And one of those hundred will make it to the American Dream stage. The other ninety-nine thousand will trudge through with $40k a year until the find another job or retire.
Capitalism is depressing if you're not both innovative AND lucky. But it beats never having a chance at all.
Most on-site manual labor jobs suck no matter how you look at them. A lot of white collar jobs suck in a different way. Unless you're in the top 10% of any white collar field, your job most likely sucks, because all the really cool jobs have been taken by that 10%.
The key is most jobs suck because, hey, they're jobs. If they weren't they'd be hobbies, and you'd either love them or you'd go do something else.
"but I'd not leave my current $120K+ job in a city"
See, that's not who they're looking for. If you're making $60/hr and have a job, you're not really the ideal candidate. There are something like 15 million workers in the US who currently have near-zero income. Of those 15 million, apparently none of them are interested in this as a job, despite wages which are $20/hr more than they are currently getting paid.
I wouldn't be surprised if 80% of those people could not, for one reason or another, do this job. That only leaves 3 million. If 99% of them aren't willing or able to relocate, that still leaves 30,000 people. And yet the candidate pool doesn't even appear to be that deep.
Actually, emissions from automotive exhausts are far cleaner than the effluent from a cigarette.
Mostly unrelated, as smell is a poor indicator of exhast, but I can tell when someone is smoking in another car, often several ahead of me, in slow traffic or at a stop light. The smell of exhaust from the cars doesn't even come close to covering it up.
I lived in socal for a couple years, and I'm pretty sure that (2) is always acted upon in the way you describe (1).
Actually, it does have some advantages for very shallow depth of field photography, as it can be challenging to get just the *right* focus point. This would let you post-process tweak the results. (If I had a dime for every shot that had the hair/bangs in focus but not the eyes!)
It would also allow fast photography (motion capture) with an infinite depth of field at telephoto lengths. Since you can choose the focus after the fact, it should be just a matter of a (future) photoshop plugin to combine the image planes to get optimal focus at all lengths and then combine the planes into a single image. It would be like a HDR image, but for focus. No, it's not useful in every shot - but it's an artistic choice that's not currently available for some scenes.
And what will keep these superconductors at superconducting temperatures? Or have they solved the room temperature superconducting problem? May as well say you'll use super strong cable and make a space elevator at that point.
Paying for getting there is all well and good; I'd be more concerned about the costs of getting back down!
Actually, the problem isn't getting up, it's staying up. It may only take 294MJ to get there, but in order to stay in orbit you have to be moving at 7-8km/s to do it. 1/2mV^2 = (0.5x100kgx8000m/s^2) if I got my units right = 3200MJ, which is an orders of magnitude larger, not accounting for any losses in friction or energy transfer, so it may be off by at least a factor of four more, likely more like 10. Not bad for materials with a 0.5 payload to casing ratio, but still expensive if you want to keep that flesh alive once you get there, and have a way to get back down uncooked. ;-)
Centripetal forces.
No, that's the same problem with just running the tube on the ground - when you exit, the pressure forces at orbital velocity will tear any vehicle apart. Build one tough enough to hold together and it will burn up from friction. Plus the losses at seal level will mean you would need far, far more speed than orbital velocity to "coast" to space.
That, of course, presumes you're willing to deal with the 16,000psi pressures, continuous immersion in salt water, and the enormous buoyant force that would come with an underwater tube.
But the biggest challenges are mudane. I did not notice any safety configuration for when the current fails and the power is no longer available to support the magnetic separation. The unpowered mode of this structure is unstable.
I suppose you could lower it each time you finished a launch, but then you have to spend the power to raise the whole thing again. I would expect they would build it on the ground and the cables would have automatic takeup/retraction (that's a lot of cable!), so it could be lowered.
WTF - a zero chance of war means 11:40pm. Shouldn't that be closer to 12:01 AM? I mean 10 minutes to midnight (when, I presume, we launch the pumpkins and somebody gets caught wearing rags instead of a ball gown) sounds a lot worse when compared to a 24 hours day than to a 20 minute window.
Threat Level for the day: Chartreuse
Actually, it means that if you don't have lots of free time, or prefer not to spend an inordinate amount of time in the game, you can still have a complete, fulfilling experience, leaving some of the drudgery time wasters behind. I means you can do more of the fun stuff with the time you spend.
Do you know how to update the bluetooth drivers on a high end Kenwood head unit? The only way to do it is via Bluetooth. So if your BT isn't working correctly, you should have it connect to a bluetooth device and do an update. Update not work and your BT is no longer operational? Just update it by connecting to the...oh shit.
I haven't had it fail, but damn it just seems ripe for problems. Of course, it's Kenwood, so nothing really works well.