If I am required to send a file to someone for some work (I have actually done this in the last year, so I'm not even making it up), if there is an issue, I can get away with saying "It must be something with Word", I can't get away with saying "It must be something with the program I am using to edit the file."
That quote from Star Wars addresses this, the more Apple locks down the platform and has to deal with kerfuffles over this or that program that they did not approve, the more awareness people will have of the shittiness, and the harder it will be for them to be shitty.
Of course, between not wanting a gatekeeper and being a cheap-ass, I haven't even considered buying one. But I'm not worried about the masses either.
Read every banned book? What a terrible idea, I'm sure lots of them were awful (in the sense that they were marginally readable pablum, not in the sense that they are naughty or heretical).
I was watching, I think, Nova Science Now. There was a segment about artificial diamonds, and a researcher had the host hold a penny up to a cube of ice, and then a chunk of diamond up to the ice. With the penny, he waited a second and said "I feel the cold." With the diamond, he instantly said "Hey, the ice is melting."
How would a situation that is slightly better than the situation that exists today in any way constitute a disaster?
With the iPhone supporting H.264, plenty of websites are going to follow, and it is reasonably likely that some third party will come up with a shim that enables H.264 in Firefox (using FFMPEG, some derivative of FFMPEG, or maybe Windows internal codecs (if there is support there, I'm not paying attention)).
It looks like $15 worth would be plenty for a single CPU, if you are bothering with overclocking, I would think that is peanuts.
It also looks like his thin layer is awful thick (but I don't spend a lot of time overclocking, I just understand that the point of the thermal grease is only to fill voids, direct contact is preferable), so it might cost even less.
If you are nuts. You would probably be better off spending 20 minutes to first figure out if there are any situations where you are feeding untrusted xml input into python, rather than completely spazzing out.
The first stage of my filter would stop fish but allow through plastic.
The microscopic life is going to be more problematic, but not worrying too much about it and going slow would probably work out (because the dead zone from the filter would always be tiny).
If you use somewhat absurd assumptions, the upper limit on the amount of material is probably something like 20 cubic miles. That's assuming that the float is 10 times the size of Alaska (the wikipedia article goes as low as twice the size of Texas), that 5 milligram particles are present at a density of 1 million / square meter (that's combining two unrelated numbers from Wikipedia), and that the density of the material is approximately equal to the density of water (this isn't so absurd, it is floating). Google can handle the calculation, but/. can't handle the url, the following should work if copied into a Google search:
(6 million square miles) * (5 million milligrams / (square meter)) * (1 cubic meter / (1000 kg)) -> cubic miles
I sort of doubt that the material covers 6 million square miles at a density of 5 kg / square meter, and I'm pretty sure that the waste handling systems of several western states could easily handle the material as fast as it could be pulled from the ocean, so no single landfill could handle it all at once, but it wouldn't really be that big a deal to take care of the collected material.
If by 'the coast' you mean the western United States, it would be a goddamn lot cheaper to stick it in a landfill than it would be to ship it to Hawaii and drop it in a volcano. If it is clean enough, it could probably be recycled, maybe even for less than it would cost to landfill it.
Also, from what I have read/remembered, 'make a big ship that filters it' is not a simple activity, the particles are quite small.
What purpose does the penalty serve? You comment as if it is self evident that hardware companies should be able to enlist the government to enforce their business needs (the signing, law or not, serves the business need of giving the manufacturer significant control over most of the consoles, I doubt penetration for mod chips would be particularly higher if they were clearly legal).
Is there some threshold below which the anti-circumvention provision of the DMCA makes sense?
I'm comfortable simply taking the fact that companies insist on being gatekeepers into account when I make hardware purchases, but that doesn't make me any happier that congress enshrined it into law.
Slashdot Mirror
If I am required to send a file to someone for some work (I have actually done this in the last year, so I'm not even making it up), if there is an issue, I can get away with saying "It must be something with Word", I can't get away with saying "It must be something with the program I am using to edit the file."
I wish I could, but no, not yet.
That quote from Star Wars addresses this, the more Apple locks down the platform and has to deal with kerfuffles over this or that program that they did not approve, the more awareness people will have of the shittiness, and the harder it will be for them to be shitty.
Of course, between not wanting a gatekeeper and being a cheap-ass, I haven't even considered buying one. But I'm not worried about the masses either.
Read every banned book? What a terrible idea, I'm sure lots of them were awful (in the sense that they were marginally readable pablum, not in the sense that they are naughty or heretical).
It's good to see that I did not completely butcher the remembering (the big lie on my part is that they used an actual piece of copper, not a penny).
They are already made out of stainless steel. The primary reason they go 'dull' is mineralization.
You don't look at the status bar before clicking any link?
Ruins the adventure on a site that filters javascript out of user content.
I was watching, I think, Nova Science Now. There was a segment about artificial diamonds, and a researcher had the host hold a penny up to a cube of ice, and then a chunk of diamond up to the ice. With the penny, he waited a second and said "I feel the cold." With the diamond, he instantly said "Hey, the ice is melting."
How would a situation that is slightly better than the situation that exists today in any way constitute a disaster?
With the iPhone supporting H.264, plenty of websites are going to follow, and it is reasonably likely that some third party will come up with a shim that enables H.264 in Firefox (using FFMPEG, some derivative of FFMPEG, or maybe Windows internal codecs (if there is support there, I'm not paying attention)).
It looks like $15 worth would be plenty for a single CPU, if you are bothering with overclocking, I would think that is peanuts.
It also looks like his thin layer is awful thick (but I don't spend a lot of time overclocking, I just understand that the point of the thermal grease is only to fill voids, direct contact is preferable), so it might cost even less.
It is utterly preposterous that the above claim was not deemed obvious.
If you are nuts. You would probably be better off spending 20 minutes to first figure out if there are any situations where you are feeding untrusted xml input into python, rather than completely spazzing out.
I suggest switching to a diet of hay, for the higher protein content.
Maybe. The problem is that many westerners are comfortable with harsh treatment for people they have mentally classified as 'bad'.
For example, see the blase attitude of many Americans towards prison rape and so forth.
Set your formatting pref to 'Plain Old Text'
One CR is a linebreak.
Two is a paragraph.
(At least for the classic comment system, I have the AJAX system turned off and have no idea how it does or does not work)
The first stage of my filter would stop fish but allow through plastic.
The microscopic life is going to be more problematic, but not worrying too much about it and going slow would probably work out (because the dead zone from the filter would always be tiny).
If you use somewhat absurd assumptions, the upper limit on the amount of material is probably something like 20 cubic miles. That's assuming that the float is 10 times the size of Alaska (the wikipedia article goes as low as twice the size of Texas), that 5 milligram particles are present at a density of 1 million / square meter (that's combining two unrelated numbers from Wikipedia), and that the density of the material is approximately equal to the density of water (this isn't so absurd, it is floating). Google can handle the calculation, but /. can't handle the url, the following should work if copied into a Google search:
(6 million square miles) * (5 million milligrams / (square meter)) * (1 cubic meter / (1000 kg)) -> cubic miles
I sort of doubt that the material covers 6 million square miles at a density of 5 kg / square meter, and I'm pretty sure that the waste handling systems of several western states could easily handle the material as fast as it could be pulled from the ocean, so no single landfill could handle it all at once, but it wouldn't really be that big a deal to take care of the collected material.
If by 'the coast' you mean the western United States, it would be a goddamn lot cheaper to stick it in a landfill than it would be to ship it to Hawaii and drop it in a volcano. If it is clean enough, it could probably be recycled, maybe even for less than it would cost to landfill it.
Also, from what I have read/remembered, 'make a big ship that filters it' is not a simple activity, the particles are quite small.
So were early digital cameras.
Give it 10 or 15 generations.
It isn't just humans, it is all vertebrates and some invertebrates.
It looks like direct physical damage and a kidney stone blocking one kidney would be the most common causes of one kidney failing.
You have two kidneys because they are very necessary and prone to failure.
A simple answer is that it isn't much of a problem (how many deadly incidents have there been in the last decade?) and there are thousands of radios.
What purpose does the penalty serve? You comment as if it is self evident that hardware companies should be able to enlist the government to enforce their business needs (the signing, law or not, serves the business need of giving the manufacturer significant control over most of the consoles, I doubt penetration for mod chips would be particularly higher if they were clearly legal).
I disagree. The exercise is to first justify the law.
Hardware would still be able to refuse to run unsigned binaries without the DMCA.
Anyway, XBMC fits the bill.
Is there some threshold below which the anti-circumvention provision of the DMCA makes sense?
I'm comfortable simply taking the fact that companies insist on being gatekeepers into account when I make hardware purchases, but that doesn't make me any happier that congress enshrined it into law.
Nice of the enforcement people to hit submit for poor tuxgeek after they dragged him away from his computer.