You can probably take out the material costs past the first battery. If this tech became common place you would probably get a "core" deduction for trading out batteries.
Sorry. I used to have my comment threshold set all the way down so I could see everything. I just got sick and tired of scrolling past that wall of text and links that seemed to be posted on every single thread.
I don't see why the transfer would not be legitimate regardless of whether or not the original owner can illegally use the media after-the-fact. A user can buy a CD, copy the contents to their hard drive, and then resell the CD. That sale would be completely legitimate and legal and the buyer would be in the clear. If the original owner went back and actually used the copied files, then the original owner would be breaking the law because they have already transferred their license but the sale would still be legitimate and legal. Why not treat digital goods the same way?
You are using a too rigid definition of copying vs transferring. In the digital world, no information is transferred without "copying". The difference between copying and transferring is simply duration. A router copies digital packets into its buffer, send a copy down the link, and deletes the packet from its buffer. We don't require networking equipment owners to have a license for all content transfer over their equipment. Your computer copies music into RAM, its registers, and then sends a electrical copy to the speakers/headphones. We don't require a user have two or three licenses to use a music file. I don't see why transmitting a file once and then deleting the source file should be constituted as a copy instead of a transfer. Besides, as other have said, the legal entity involved is the license not the file itself.
I doubt cops need a warrant to friend you on Facebook and look through you profile. After all, you had to accept them as a friend. It is the equivalent of inviting a cop into your house and them noticing your pot stash on the living room table.
Eventually, media streaming sites are going to start offering higher quality streams than they do now. More people are buying 3D-capable TVs/screens. Many of those people will start expecting their media sites to start including 3D content. More and more media sales are being distributed digitally via downloads instead of disks. More and more people are moving to using VOIP and other internet based communication. Average users are starting to backup/sync to the cloud. Combining everything it is not hard to image "Internet traffic volume is doubling every three years" for at least a while.
Because the general trend is the average person's usage has been going up over time. Netflix alone has substantially increased what the average person consumes.
... Either that or it has turned into a meme that encourages the the likes of 4chan/b/tards to, in their own way, declare I am Spartacus(APK), just for the lolz...
How can anyone be in favor of both warrantless spying and democratic form of government?
Those that are in favor are those in power or those that "think of the children" without actually pausing to consider what it means when those children become adults.
Does Twitter even have a physical/legal presence in France? It not, the most France can do is force its ISPs to block Twitter and I find that unlikely.
Because the publishers want to sell you double HD, triple HD, etc. in the future. They can't do that if they sell you the master quality recordings from the get go.
So its just a useless file that everyone has and if they want to actually use it they just replace the whole thing? Why not just create a block of random bits? An highly oppressive country will just illegalize said OS/feature and would still likely throw users in jail or kill them for having encrypted (empty) content on their hard drives. Oppressive governments don't tend to tolerate clever games unless they are the ones committing them.
I am confused. At some point, to decrypt you need a key. This could be using biometric, a password, a keycard, a thumbdrive, built-in hardware storage, etc. If the valid users do not have the ability to decrypt the contents, then the encryption would be worthless.
Slashdot Mirror
If it has happened, which I highly doubt, the public deserves to know.
You can probably take out the material costs past the first battery. If this tech became common place you would probably get a "core" deduction for trading out batteries.
Sorry. I used to have my comment threshold set all the way down so I could see everything. I just got sick and tired of scrolling past that wall of text and links that seemed to be posted on every single thread.
I don't see why the transfer would not be legitimate regardless of whether or not the original owner can illegally use the media after-the-fact. A user can buy a CD, copy the contents to their hard drive, and then resell the CD. That sale would be completely legitimate and legal and the buyer would be in the clear. If the original owner went back and actually used the copied files, then the original owner would be breaking the law because they have already transferred their license but the sale would still be legitimate and legal. Why not treat digital goods the same way?
You are using a too rigid definition of copying vs transferring. In the digital world, no information is transferred without "copying". The difference between copying and transferring is simply duration. A router copies digital packets into its buffer, send a copy down the link, and deletes the packet from its buffer. We don't require networking equipment owners to have a license for all content transfer over their equipment. Your computer copies music into RAM, its registers, and then sends a electrical copy to the speakers/headphones. We don't require a user have two or three licenses to use a music file. I don't see why transmitting a file once and then deleting the source file should be constituted as a copy instead of a transfer. Besides, as other have said, the legal entity involved is the license not the file itself.
The first one was OK. The second was annoying. All the others were frustrating. Just stop! We don't need a dozen April Fool's feeds.
No one mentioned Android until you did.
I doubt cops need a warrant to friend you on Facebook and look through you profile. After all, you had to accept them as a friend. It is the equivalent of inviting a cop into your house and them noticing your pot stash on the living room table.
Eventually, media streaming sites are going to start offering higher quality streams than they do now. More people are buying 3D-capable TVs/screens. Many of those people will start expecting their media sites to start including 3D content. More and more media sales are being distributed digitally via downloads instead of disks. More and more people are moving to using VOIP and other internet based communication. Average users are starting to backup/sync to the cloud. Combining everything it is not hard to image "Internet traffic volume is doubling every three years" for at least a while.
What's your IP address?
Because the general trend is the average person's usage has been going up over time. Netflix alone has substantially increased what the average person consumes.
... Either that or it has turned into a meme that encourages the the likes of 4chan /b/tards to, in their own way, declare I am Spartacus(APK), just for the lolz...
More like Spamtacus.
I am curious what percentage of Walmarts are not 24/7 because it has been a long time since I have seen one.
But hey, if you want to drive across town because you need the excercise, rock on man.
You are doing it wrong.
There is value in knowing that when you leave work no one if likely to bother you until the next work day.
How can anyone be in favor of both warrantless spying and democratic form of government?
Those that are in favor are those in power or those that "think of the children" without actually pausing to consider what it means when those children become adults.
Brain Scans Predict Which Criminals Are More Likely To Be Caught Re-offending
Sounds like the Protoss versus the Zerg.
What about passengers? Why would you want to disable their Glass?
Which panels are you referring to?
So what's your solution?
Does Twitter even have a physical/legal presence in France? It not, the most France can do is force its ISPs to block Twitter and I find that unlikely.
Because the publishers want to sell you double HD, triple HD, etc. in the future. They can't do that if they sell you the master quality recordings from the get go.
So its just a useless file that everyone has and if they want to actually use it they just replace the whole thing? Why not just create a block of random bits? An highly oppressive country will just illegalize said OS/feature and would still likely throw users in jail or kill them for having encrypted (empty) content on their hard drives. Oppressive governments don't tend to tolerate clever games unless they are the ones committing them.
I am confused. At some point, to decrypt you need a key. This could be using biometric, a password, a keycard, a thumbdrive, built-in hardware storage, etc. If the valid users do not have the ability to decrypt the contents, then the encryption would be worthless.