What about the 6" touch screen radio head unit that came standard on my '13 Tacoma? Is that a video screen and I can receive a ticket for that?
Possibly, yes. Does it "produce[s] entertainment"?
What about my digital odometer read out in my dash? That's about the same size as Google Glass and actually requires me to look down and away from the road (along with the speedometer and all the other gauges).
You're not required to look down at your gauges. You can choose to when it's safe to do so, and you want the information. That's a little different to the possibility of a stream of images being projected into your eye no matter where you look. The spoiling of night vision alone would seem to be something to be wary of, never mind the data distraction.
No. She's probably not proud of her actions; she's acting proud because righteous indignation is just what some (most?) people do when they know they're in the wrong but see a chance to get away with it.
And yet people get charged/arrested for driving with an open container of alcohol, even if there's no proof they were drinking it.
That's an easier one though, because driving with an open container in the car is specifically against the law by itself (right?). Was she ticketed because she was using - or resonably suspected of using - her Glass, or because she was wearing it?
I'm on the fence as to whether it's beyond reasonable doubt that someone wearing Glass is using Glass, but I'd be happy for it to be ticketable just to wear it, like the open container thing.
So all you've done is split your software into two parts - the generic front end running in a browser, and a server which still has to support all of that mysterious hardware.
Microsoft remotely deleted a characteristic version of Tor and other maliciously installed software which a botnet had installed from Windows machines to stop said botnet, just as it does for all kinds of malicious software via its (get this) Malicious Software Removal tool (which regularly appears in Windows Update) and/or Microsoft Security Essentials, which you, the user, gave it permission to do.
But they found out it was a password that he had already given them for something else.
It doesn't say that they already had that password, only that he used it on other systems. He may have only just told them this.
Here he tried to trade this password for time.
It says he gave up the password because they've opened a separate investigation into fraud. It's not clear whether he did so because he thought he'd be treated more leniently if found guilty, but it's a reasonable assumption. I don't see anything to indicate that he was angling for time off his existing sentence.
The poster was assuming that the device was splitting water into hydrogen and oxygen, which it does not do, but (and this was my point) also does not claim to do (unlike the other things it doesn't do, which it doesn't do because it doesn't exist and appears to be nothing more than an artist's fantasy).
Using a very small but powerful micro compressor, it compresses oxygen and stores the extracted oxygen in storage tank. The micro compressor operates through micro battery.
No-one said it was a free lunch.
So if it actually separates the oxygen...
It doesn't. There's plenty of molecular oxygen dissolved in seawater. The fish know.
Slashdot Mirror
We'll have self-driving cars long before then.
What about the 6" touch screen radio head unit that came standard on my '13 Tacoma? Is that a video screen and I can receive a ticket for that?
Possibly, yes. Does it "produce[s] entertainment"?
What about my digital odometer read out in my dash? That's about the same size as Google Glass and actually requires me to look down and away from the road (along with the speedometer and all the other gauges).
You're not required to look down at your gauges. You can choose to when it's safe to do so, and you want the information. That's a little different to the possibility of a stream of images being projected into your eye no matter where you look. The spoiling of night vision alone would seem to be something to be wary of, never mind the data distraction.
No. She's probably not proud of her actions; she's acting proud because righteous indignation is just what some (most?) people do when they know they're in the wrong but see a chance to get away with it.
And yet people get charged/arrested for driving with an open container of alcohol, even if there's no proof they were drinking it.
That's an easier one though, because driving with an open container in the car is specifically against the law by itself (right?). Was she ticketed because she was using - or resonably suspected of using - her Glass, or because she was wearing it?
I'm on the fence as to whether it's beyond reasonable doubt that someone wearing Glass is using Glass, but I'd be happy for it to be ticketable just to wear it, like the open container thing.
So all you've done is split your software into two parts - the generic front end running in a browser, and a server which still has to support all of that mysterious hardware.
The hardware doesn't matter.
It does if there are no Windows 7 drivers or other reasons it may not run Windows 7 (at all, or well enough).
The software that's running on XP will also run on Win7.
How do you know for sure? Do you work with ATM software?
Because data may be data but proprietary protocols are proprietary protocols.
Say that again ten times fast.
make 15% more per year, on average, from paying customers of streaming services
They pay the customers and make more money? It's win-win!
But the MP4 versions 'ould enable...
I think you accidentally a etter.
Many wikimedia regulars
That should, of course, be Wikimedia, with a big wuh.
Can we replace the words "Posted by" with "Blindly rubber-stamped by"?
Microsoft remotely deleted a characteristic version of Tor and other maliciously installed software which a botnet had installed from Windows machines to stop said botnet, just as it does for all kinds of malicious software via its (get this) Malicious Software Removal tool (which regularly appears in Windows Update) and/or Microsoft Security Essentials, which you, the user, gave it permission to do.
...but it didn't fit*.
*in length or in terms of agenda.
which is also readable to anyone on the host PC.
So that's what is meant by "bypassing lock screen or PIN security features"?
simply by connecting the phone to a computer
On first read I thought someone had hacked into their servers over dial-up, but it wasn't that interesting.
Are we really just calling this "a USB" now instead of "a USB flash drive" or something similar?
No, they just need an editor to look out for when people accidentally a word.
But they found out it was a password that he had already given them for something else.
It doesn't say that they already had that password, only that he used it on other systems. He may have only just told them this.
Here he tried to trade this password for time.
It says he gave up the password because they've opened a separate investigation into fraud. It's not clear whether he did so because he thought he'd be treated more leniently if found guilty, but it's a reasonable assumption. I don't see anything to indicate that he was angling for time off his existing sentence.
In the UK, if you didn't tell the police when they were investigating, you can't tell the jury either.
Of course you can, but it won't look good, and a UK jury isn't restricted from inferring from that fact.
I released a similar tool two years ago and I'm still eagerly waiting for someone to discover it.
I sent you an email to say thanks but it would have looked like a letter from a Nigerian diplomat.
But normal people do not need this - it's completely loony-tunes.
Normal people shouldn't need this. What's completely loony-tunes is that they do.
Oh, you were so close!
you could use Adobe to design, print and build your adobe abode!
You could also use Adobe to dawb the wardrobe and floor boards in your adobe adobe.
The poster was assuming that the device was splitting water into hydrogen and oxygen, which it does not do, but (and this was my point) also does not claim to do (unlike the other things it doesn't do, which it doesn't do because it doesn't exist and appears to be nothing more than an artist's fantasy).
Good point, though I did beat you to it ;)
Too good to be true.
Not at all:
That is to say, there are plenty of reasons why this thing is too good to be true, but GP's complaints are not among them.
We're using these new tungsten carbide bee razors...
Too good to be true.
Not at all:
Using a very small but powerful micro compressor, it compresses oxygen and stores the extracted oxygen in storage tank.
The micro compressor operates through micro battery.
No-one said it was a free lunch.
So if it actually separates the oxygen...
It doesn't. There's plenty of molecular oxygen dissolved in seawater. The fish know.
"You mean your Chevy?"
"...yes."
Also, beekeepers like their women the way they like their coffee. Covered in bees.
DNA Detectives Count Thousands of Fish Using a Glass of Water
Researchers also discerned which of the species were most plentiful in the tank.
Someone doesn't know what counting is (the article had the good grace to put it in scare quotes).