My favourite is actually nothing like anything you have on your site, but more similar to this one, only you make it diagonally across the paper so that it (a) has a longer extension at the rear bottom but almost none at the top, which seems to make it more stable somehow and (b) has a larger diameter. I've flown one made from an A3 sheet over a distance of about 60-70m (large lecture theatre) and it is beautifully slow and graceful.
Re: Exhibit 1. I can only assume this was configured by T-Mobile, and has nothing to do with the the phone's operating system. Once again, Android is open source, you can look at the default settings it is configured with if not changed by phone manufacturer or supplier, and they do not include any such message.
Re: Exhibit 2. I never denied that Windows Phone does this. Windows Phone is a horrible system that doesn't deserve to ever be used, so I'm not going to defend it in any way.
This meant that the fan ran non-stop at full speed after coming back from S3 which made S3 somewhat less useful. I never tested this under Windows, but I see no reason why it wouldn't have caused a problem since nothing else is going to reset this hardware after resuming. The machine was only "fit for purpose" if the purpose didn't include standard features such as handling power management correctly.
My understanding is that DSDT can contain OS-specific sections. They may only have set up the Windows-specific section correctly. Or they may have supplied Windows chipset drivers that ignore the DSDT and cause the system to work regardless. Also Windows (like Linux) has a method of instructing it to ignore the system DSDT and use one provided by OS configuration; the preinstalled images and recovery images they supplied may have had such a table installed by default.
Acer are, I think, within their rights to assume that if you wipe their OS image and install your own, you are on your own with regards to whether it actually works or not.
Maybe a fourth regret was not paying attention in class when they were teaching basic counting skills.
You appear to be counting "women I should've tried harder to fuck" and "not having kids sooner" as separate regrets. It appears I have to inform you that there is actually an intrinsic link between these two, and they could therefore be counted as a single regret.
Yes, and why do you think Apple hardware cost more? There's no reason, intrinsically, that the MC68000-series chips that original Macs were based on should cost more than the 80286 and 386 they competed with. But the sheer bulk of vendors buying Intel chips drove economies of scale that made Intel chips cheaper. Same for PowerPC vs 486/Pentium.
The cheapest Android phone I can buy new (according to a quick search on Amazon) is £45 (Samsung E2330), and you can get quite a reasonable one for about £150 - mine was £100, and is a couple of years old but still pretty reasonable.
I consider my £55 Samsung S5570 quite reasonable, certainly much better than the E2330 (cap multitouch screen, 3.x" rather than 2", and I'm not convinced that the 2330 really is an android phone -- some vendors say it is, but hardware stats don't seem to back up that it would be capable of it, e.g. its screen res is lower than android's officially supported minimum).
And *nothing* annoys me more than their "Sent from my iFad" appended to e-mail messages. So long, commercial-free e-mail.
I note that you didn't include the "Sent from my Android Phone" (got one of those from my Nephew the other day) and "Sent from my Windows Phone" (get those from at least one of my employer's clients). Both of those platforms have a built-in Sig, too.
But yet, once again, it is Apple that gets singled-out.
Fucktard.
I just tested my brand new out-of-the-box last week android phone (Samsung) that I haven't changed my sig on, and it doesn't send one of those. Neither does my closer-to-AOSP cheapass tablet. Neither do they have an option to enable such a signature. The string you suggest is included by default isn't in the strings table of the default Android email app, and it would be a serious violation of the coding standard if it were elsewhere. Evidence seems to suggest you're just making this shit up.
There's no practical way to put 4 GPUs in a 16-core machine and have them virtualized, one each, to 4 instances of Windows
Yes, there is, it just requires hardware that is not present in consumer-level machines (PCI-SIG IO Virtualization, example implementation). Or alternatively, you can use GPU-accelerated emulation of a virtual GPU as (e.g.) vmware is capable of... that doesn't even require 4 GPUs to be present, although you can only expect approximately 20% of the performance of the host GPU in the virtual machines (direct IO virtualization should be faster than this).
It's bad enough that each machine has to do video compression as well as running the game.
This can be trivially achieved either with an additional GPU or with custom video compression hardware.
I don't see why Microsoft have to use the same licensing terms for different customers.
Because they're a monopoly, and per-customer pricing is ripe for abuse. Basically, any license any MS customer gets, anybody else should be able to get on the same terms (which includes volume, so the OEM/consumer distinction will still work for them).
My Acer laptop battery died after about 15 months, Acer told me that it was a "consumable" and therefore refused to replace it under the 2 year warranty (notably the replacement battery I bought has now died after a similar length of time, which suggests to me that the fault is in the laptop, not the battery)
15 months of daily use = about 400 cycles, which is roughly the minimum expected lifespan of a li-ion battery. I see no evidence of fault. Yes, they *can* last up to 3 times that long, but only with high quality batteries in optimal conditions (i.e. kept at or below room temperature at all times) and you're unlikely to see this in a laptop.
There were other problems that Acer refused to deal with. For example, the DSDT is broken on this hardware (Travelmate 6413), and Acer refused to acknowledge any fault or release a new BIOS, despite me fixing the DSDT and sending them the fixed code.
DSDT is an optional feature, unless they are specifically advertising compliance with the ACPI specification (I have *never* seen an end-user PC manufacturer advertise this). Most things (i.e. consumer editions of Windows and most features of most versions of Linux) work acceptably with a broken DSDT, so there is no legal reason why they would have to fix it (the machine is fit for the purpose it was sold for even with such a problem).
Unfortunately a lot of modern electronics are poorly fabricated, often caused by using horrible lead-free solder.
There's nothing wrong with lead-free solder as long as you don't cheapskate on either the solder itself (which should ideally be of the 4% silver variety) or the equipment to apply it (which should be capable of bringing it to a high enough temperature in a relatively short period of time).
Unfortunately, a lot of people try to get away with both cheaper solder (which needs a higher temperature) and cheaper equipment (which struggles to get up to temperature quickly enough to avoid damaging components), which is a recipe for disaster.
Yes, but it isn't the same type that D-Wave's processor solves, which is to say solving a particular class of differential equation in up to 16 8-bit variables. Most of the time spent in ray tracing is actually in database searching (finding objects that a ray intersects with), which can be sped up by a quantum algorithm, but it isn't one that can be implemented on D-Wave's machine.
It's already a felony in basically every democratic city in the world to snatch whatever private property someone else owns, and tossing it away like that (out the window).
There's an awful lot wrong with this statement.
1. The word "felony" is a technical word from US law that has a very specific meaning, and one which refers to a distinction most other countries do not (any longer) make. We have criminal offenses, which have varying scales of punishments, but we do not have the notion of different categories of offence like this. In the UK, for example, we have only a distinction between "indictable" and "summary" offences, which determines whether a jury trial is required (only for indictable offences) and whether a punishment of more than 12 months imprisonment is available (also only for indictable offenses). A felony corresponds most closely to an indictable offence, but the distinction is not really the same at all.
2. At least here in the UK, this would not be considered either theft or robbery. Theft is defined as "taking someone else's property with the intent to permanently deprive them of its use". Robbery is "taking the property of another, with the intent to permanently deprive the person of that property, by means of force or fear." As there was no intent to permanently deprive, neither offense occurred.
It may or may not be another offense. If contact was made with the holder of the phone, it may be battery, a summary offense carrying a maximum term of 6 months imprisonment in the UK. Note that battery is a less serious offence in the UK than in the US as it does not require harm to be caused. If no contact was made, but a reasonable person would have feared violence in the situation, it may be common assault, which carries a similar penalty. If neither of these occurred, but the phone was damaged, it may be criminal damage, which is also a summary offence with a maximum penalty of only 3 months imprisonment. In the event there was no touching, no threat of violence, and no damage to the phone, it isn't clear to me that any offence would have occurred at all had this happened in the UK. In any event, none of these offences are considered especially serious, and so are not in the category that we would most commonly consider as parallel to a felony.
He said "Websites can discriminate against Adblock users" which is written in a pretty negative way. Stop defending him when he's obviously stating it like it is a problem.
The word "discriminate" has a technical meaning which is simply "behave differently in each of two different cases". You appear to be assuming its common meaning is the one intended, but that was probably not the case.
If I ran a bar named after a fictional race that was featured in three highly successful movies with a fourth movie in the works using said fictional race as its name and used a bunch of copyrighted images and character names from those movies on my website I would be stunned if they didn't sue me.
Sure. For copyright infringement. At which point you put up your hands, say "OK, I shouldn't have used those images, I'll take them down, here's a few thousand pounds for your expenses so far," and it should go away.
1. Character names cannot be copyrighted. 2. Trademarks only apply in fields where they are likely to cause confusion in the minds of the consumer 3. Trademarks that are not enforced for 20+ years are generally considered to be no-longer enforceable.
This, despite the fact that the Other Change of Hobbit *is* operating in a field that could be considered by some to be confusingly similar. And the fact that you can't copyright a title, so only trademarks could possibly apply here, and nobody is suggesting that the trademark on the name "Hobbit" has in any way expired or is otherwise invalid.
Unfortunately, there are no "racketeering" offenses in UK law, at least not relating to use of lawsuits. The court can penalise people who bring lawsuits that are unlikely to win, but usually only does so in extreme cases, and it isn't something you can ask them to do -- they do it themselves when they spot of a pattern of abuse.
Unfortunately, Hollywood has two major advantages:
1) Lots of money for lawyers. 2) It's the UK legal system.
Actually, the UK legal system isn't very friendly to hollywood in this case. They would almost certainly lose if the case came to court (trademarks only work where somebody is likely to think the use of the name implies some kind of actual relationship between the two businesses, which nobody rational would in this case), and that means they would have to pay the Hobbit's legal expenses as well as their own. Because this is a likely outcome, the owners of the Hobbit are likely to be able to find a lawyer who will represent them on a conditional fee arrangement (i.e. they pay nothing, hollywood pays when they win).
Here's the thing: I've never once downloaded an MP3 from amazon, or itunes, or emusic, or an independent artist's distribution site, and ended up with child pornography. So I naturally find the claim of "I thought I was downloading music, but turns out it was pictures and video of a 6 year old being raped," to be a little hard to swallow.
I've ended up with porn while attempting to download music from Gnutella, Fasttrack, and eDonkey2000. I don't believe using either of these three systems constitutes grounds to have your children taken away from you.
The basis for this story is the man's own testimony. Why should we believe him?
Have you spent any time using the file sharing networks that don't rely on web sites with verified links to content? Prior to switching to bittorrent, I on many occasions downloaded a file that appeared to be perfectly innocent content and discovered it to be porn. I don't usually look too hard, so I have no idea if any of it was child porn, but it seems likely that at least some was.
Unless there is more evidence against him than has been revealed, I see no reason to doubt his story. It is perfectly credible, and probably happens to hundreds of people per day. Of course, there may well be evidence we are not aware of; we have only been given his side of the story, as agencies like social services in the UK have strict policies of not discussing individual cases with the press. Only if and when it comes to court will we hear their side.
Slashdot Mirror
My favourite is actually nothing like anything you have on your site, but more similar to this one, only you make it diagonally across the paper so that it (a) has a longer extension at the rear bottom but almost none at the top, which seems to make it more stable somehow and (b) has a larger diameter. I've flown one made from an A3 sheet over a distance of about 60-70m (large lecture theatre) and it is beautifully slow and graceful.
Re: Exhibit 1. I can only assume this was configured by T-Mobile, and has nothing to do with the the phone's operating system. Once again, Android is open source, you can look at the default settings it is configured with if not changed by phone manufacturer or supplier, and they do not include any such message.
Re: Exhibit 2. I never denied that Windows Phone does this. Windows Phone is a horrible system that doesn't deserve to ever be used, so I'm not going to defend it in any way.
This meant that the fan ran non-stop at full speed after coming back from S3 which made S3 somewhat less useful. I never tested this under Windows, but I see no reason why it wouldn't have caused a problem since nothing else is going to reset this hardware after resuming. The machine was only "fit for purpose" if the purpose didn't include standard features such as handling power management correctly.
My understanding is that DSDT can contain OS-specific sections. They may only have set up the Windows-specific section correctly. Or they may have supplied Windows chipset drivers that ignore the DSDT and cause the system to work regardless. Also Windows (like Linux) has a method of instructing it to ignore the system DSDT and use one provided by OS configuration; the preinstalled images and recovery images they supplied may have had such a table installed by default.
Acer are, I think, within their rights to assume that if you wipe their OS image and install your own, you are on your own with regards to whether it actually works or not.
Maybe a fourth regret was not paying attention in class when they were teaching basic counting skills.
You appear to be counting "women I should've tried harder to fuck" and "not having kids sooner" as separate regrets. It appears I have to inform you that there is actually an intrinsic link between these two, and they could therefore be counted as a single regret.
Yes, and why do you think Apple hardware cost more? There's no reason, intrinsically, that the MC68000-series chips that original Macs were based on should cost more than the 80286 and 386 they competed with. But the sheer bulk of vendors buying Intel chips drove economies of scale that made Intel chips cheaper. Same for PowerPC vs 486/Pentium.
The cheapest Android phone I can buy new (according to a quick search on Amazon) is £45 (Samsung E2330), and you can get quite a reasonable one for about £150 - mine was £100, and is a couple of years old but still pretty reasonable.
I consider my £55 Samsung S5570 quite reasonable, certainly much better than the E2330 (cap multitouch screen, 3.x" rather than 2", and I'm not convinced that the 2330 really is an android phone -- some vendors say it is, but hardware stats don't seem to back up that it would be capable of it, e.g. its screen res is lower than android's officially supported minimum).
And *nothing* annoys me more than their "Sent from my iFad" appended to e-mail messages. So long, commercial-free e-mail.
I note that you didn't include the "Sent from my Android Phone" (got one of those from my Nephew the other day) and "Sent from my Windows Phone" (get those from at least one of my employer's clients). Both of those platforms have a built-in Sig, too.
But yet, once again, it is Apple that gets singled-out.
Fucktard.
I just tested my brand new out-of-the-box last week android phone (Samsung) that I haven't changed my sig on, and it doesn't send one of those. Neither does my closer-to-AOSP cheapass tablet. Neither do they have an option to enable such a signature. The string you suggest is included by default isn't in the strings table of the default Android email app, and it would be a serious violation of the coding standard if it were elsewhere. Evidence seems to suggest you're just making this shit up.
Fucktard.
There's no practical way to put 4 GPUs in a 16-core machine and have them virtualized, one each, to 4 instances of Windows
Yes, there is, it just requires hardware that is not present in consumer-level machines (PCI-SIG IO Virtualization, example implementation). Or alternatively, you can use GPU-accelerated emulation of a virtual GPU as (e.g.) vmware is capable of... that doesn't even require 4 GPUs to be present, although you can only expect approximately 20% of the performance of the host GPU in the virtual machines (direct IO virtualization should be faster than this).
It's bad enough that each machine has to do video compression as well as running the game.
This can be trivially achieved either with an additional GPU or with custom video compression hardware.
I don't see why Microsoft have to use the same licensing terms for different customers.
Because they're a monopoly, and per-customer pricing is ripe for abuse. Basically, any license any MS customer gets, anybody else should be able to get on the same terms (which includes volume, so the OEM/consumer distinction will still work for them).
My Acer laptop battery died after about 15 months, Acer told me that it was a "consumable" and therefore refused to replace it under the 2 year warranty (notably the replacement battery I bought has now died after a similar length of time, which suggests to me that the fault is in the laptop, not the battery)
15 months of daily use = about 400 cycles, which is roughly the minimum expected lifespan of a li-ion battery. I see no evidence of fault. Yes, they *can* last up to 3 times that long, but only with high quality batteries in optimal conditions (i.e. kept at or below room temperature at all times) and you're unlikely to see this in a laptop.
There were other problems that Acer refused to deal with. For example, the DSDT is broken on this hardware (Travelmate 6413), and Acer refused to acknowledge any fault or release a new BIOS, despite me fixing the DSDT and sending them the fixed code.
DSDT is an optional feature, unless they are specifically advertising compliance with the ACPI specification (I have *never* seen an end-user PC manufacturer advertise this). Most things (i.e. consumer editions of Windows and most features of most versions of Linux) work acceptably with a broken DSDT, so there is no legal reason why they would have to fix it (the machine is fit for the purpose it was sold for even with such a problem).
Unfortunately a lot of modern electronics are poorly fabricated, often caused by using horrible lead-free solder.
There's nothing wrong with lead-free solder as long as you don't cheapskate on either the solder itself (which should ideally be of the 4% silver variety) or the equipment to apply it (which should be capable of bringing it to a high enough temperature in a relatively short period of time).
Unfortunately, a lot of people try to get away with both cheaper solder (which needs a higher temperature) and cheaper equipment (which struggles to get up to temperature quickly enough to avoid damaging components), which is a recipe for disaster.
... or a geiger counter?
Yes, but it isn't the same type that D-Wave's processor solves, which is to say solving a particular class of differential equation in up to 16 8-bit variables.
Most of the time spent in ray tracing is actually in database searching (finding objects that a ray intersects with), which can be sped up by a quantum algorithm, but it isn't one that can be implemented on D-Wave's machine.
It's already a felony in basically every democratic city in the world to snatch whatever private property someone else owns, and tossing it away like that (out the window).
There's an awful lot wrong with this statement.
1. The word "felony" is a technical word from US law that has a very specific meaning, and one which refers to a distinction most other countries do not (any longer) make. We have criminal offenses, which have varying scales of punishments, but we do not have the notion of different categories of offence like this. In the UK, for example, we have only a distinction between "indictable" and "summary" offences, which determines whether a jury trial is required (only for indictable offences) and whether a punishment of more than 12 months imprisonment is available (also only for indictable offenses). A felony corresponds most closely to an indictable offence, but the distinction is not really the same at all.
2. At least here in the UK, this would not be considered either theft or robbery. Theft is defined as "taking someone else's property with the intent to permanently deprive them of its use". Robbery is "taking the property of another, with the intent to permanently deprive the person of that property, by means of force or fear." As there was no intent to permanently deprive, neither offense occurred.
It may or may not be another offense. If contact was made with the holder of the phone, it may be battery, a summary offense carrying a maximum term of 6 months imprisonment in the UK. Note that battery is a less serious offence in the UK than in the US as it does not require harm to be caused. If no contact was made, but a reasonable person would have feared violence in the situation, it may be common assault, which carries a similar penalty. If neither of these occurred, but the phone was damaged, it may be criminal damage, which is also a summary offence with a maximum penalty of only 3 months imprisonment. In the event there was no touching, no threat of violence, and no damage to the phone, it isn't clear to me that any offence would have occurred at all had this happened in the UK. In any event, none of these offences are considered especially serious, and so are not in the category that we would most commonly consider as parallel to a felony.
He said "Websites can discriminate against Adblock users" which is written in a pretty negative way. Stop defending him when he's obviously stating it like it is a problem.
The word "discriminate" has a technical meaning which is simply "behave differently in each of two different cases". You appear to be assuming its common meaning is the one intended, but that was probably not the case.
But "Whosover files first wins", in trademark law.
Erm, no. Usage prior to registration is a defence against trademark infrinement, at least in the UK. http://www.inbrief.co.uk/intellectual-property/defences-to-trademark-infringement.htm
Both were filed in 2011 and since things like prior art and such don't apply to trademarks they seem to be well within their rights to sue.
The term in this case isn't "prior art" but "earlier use", and it very definitely is a defense against trademark infringement. See: http://www.inbrief.co.uk/intellectual-property/defences-to-trademark-infringement.htm
If I ran a bar named after a fictional race that was featured in three highly successful movies with a fourth movie in the works using said fictional race as its name and used a bunch of copyrighted images and character names from those movies on my website I would be stunned if they didn't sue me.
Sure. For copyright infringement. At which point you put up your hands, say "OK, I shouldn't have used those images, I'll take them down, here's a few thousand pounds for your expenses so far," and it should go away.
1. Character names cannot be copyrighted.
2. Trademarks only apply in fields where they are likely to cause confusion in the minds of the consumer
3. Trademarks that are not enforced for 20+ years are generally considered to be no-longer enforceable.
+1
This, despite the fact that the Other Change of Hobbit *is* operating in a field that could be considered by some to be confusingly similar. And the fact that you can't copyright a title, so only trademarks could possibly apply here, and nobody is suggesting that the trademark on the name "Hobbit" has in any way expired or is otherwise invalid.
Unfortunately, there are no "racketeering" offenses in UK law, at least not relating to use of lawsuits. The court can penalise people who bring lawsuits that are unlikely to win, but usually only does so in extreme cases, and it isn't something you can ask them to do -- they do it themselves when they spot of a pattern of abuse.
Unfortunately, Hollywood has two major advantages:
1) Lots of money for lawyers.
2) It's the UK legal system.
Actually, the UK legal system isn't very friendly to hollywood in this case. They would almost certainly lose if the case came to court (trademarks only work where somebody is likely to think the use of the name implies some kind of actual relationship between the two businesses, which nobody rational would in this case), and that means they would have to pay the Hobbit's legal expenses as well as their own. Because this is a likely outcome, the owners of the Hobbit are likely to be able to find a lawyer who will represent them on a conditional fee arrangement (i.e. they pay nothing, hollywood pays when they win).
(This is not legal advice.)
Pretty sure the UK doesn't have a constitution.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution_of_the_United_Kingdom
That it doesn't consist of a single document does not mean it does not exist.
Here's the thing: I've never once downloaded an MP3 from amazon, or itunes, or emusic, or an independent artist's distribution site, and ended up with child pornography. So I naturally find the claim of "I thought I was downloading music, but turns out it was pictures and video of a 6 year old being raped," to be a little hard to swallow.
I've ended up with porn while attempting to download music from Gnutella, Fasttrack, and eDonkey2000. I don't believe using either of these three systems constitutes grounds to have your children taken away from you.
The basis for this story is the man's own testimony. Why should we believe him?
Have you spent any time using the file sharing networks that don't rely on web sites with verified links to content? Prior to switching to bittorrent, I on many occasions downloaded a file that appeared to be perfectly innocent content and discovered it to be porn. I don't usually look too hard, so I have no idea if any of it was child porn, but it seems likely that at least some was.
Unless there is more evidence against him than has been revealed, I see no reason to doubt his story. It is perfectly credible, and probably happens to hundreds of people per day. Of course, there may well be evidence we are not aware of; we have only been given his side of the story, as agencies like social services in the UK have strict policies of not discussing individual cases with the press. Only if and when it comes to court will we hear their side.
Gary McKinnon didn't think Glasgow was under federal jursidiction, either.
Kids get injured at foster care, or abused at foster care, or even molested at foster care? Too bad. No apology, no recourse,
Utter bullshit. Do you think foster carers are given some sort of immunity from prosecution? You have no idea what you're talking about.
No, but that's a police matter, not social services. As far as social services is concerned, the still did their job.