That's a design problem. An LCD picture is 100% predictable in terms of the size and position of the picture. LCD monitors don't have options to (un)widen/lengthen/rotate the picture because the picture is an exact representation of the pixels that are sent to the screen. So if the text / arrows on the screen do not line up with the buttons, then it means whoever designed that UI screwed up and did not actually bother to position the elements correctly.
(It could also mean something like there are several different models of ATM in the field and the options/text won't fit properly on some ATMs, again, a UI issue).
This has nothing to do with calibration as there is nothing that is out-of-spec hardware wise.
Curious: have you actually tried virtualizing NTP or do you just think its a bad idea without any experience?
I virtualize ntp for UNIX (build cluster and lab farm) and domain controllers for Windows (which acts as a time server for our 5000 or so desktops at work). Both Microsoft and VMWare explicitly support doing timekeeping functions in their associated hypervisors so long as you follow their guides. No problems whatsoever.
I hope you realize that the internet is going to have much higher latency spikes than your hypervisor will (unless its badly configured or extremely overcommitted).
If you're trying to "correlate logs down to the microsecond" then you should either be using a local time source or should be getting your time from a nearby source on the network.
I'm not sure you understand how hypervisors or NTP really work.
You seem to have a different definition of acknowledgement. They mention clearly that the court ruled as such. I would say that is a pretty clear acknowledgement.
What you're wanting is for Apple to say and admit they were wrong; in other words you're wanting submission. That's a matter of opinion. In the legal world, yeah, Apple lost, but in the hearts and minds of the people running Apple, the courts were wrong and no order or ruling will change how they feel about that. If the court really ordered that (which they did not), how would you enforce that? You would basically be ordering Apple to lie about their own feelings and then you would be ordering them either forever or for some length of time to never contradict those statements.
Regarding time: I don't think you have to build the entire thing all at once. You could construct it over the course of centuries or millennia while still benefiting from the incremental energy output gains you achieve as the build is in progress.
I don't think Google Brazil *can* comply. If Google Brazil is set up anything like how my employer's international entities are set up, they are actually separate and distinct legal entities from the parent company (which is HQ'd in USA) that the parent company has 100% ownership of.
The guy who is in charge of the Brazil office can't effect a decision at the home office.
Brazilian law may deliberately hold executives of foreign subsidiaries responsible for their parent's actions, but from a legal perspective, Brazil has no way to go after the company who actually can effect their demands.
That's a strawman. Nobody says that the 3D deformations are what makes Apple Maps suck, and even if they did, you still haven't proven that Apple Maps are better in this area than Google Maps, you've only established that Google Earth has some examples of similar problems but for all we know they're at a much lower frequency.
There is a whole laundry list of problems that people have been talking about since the iOS 6 beta - things like cities being in the totally wrong place, a lack of detail (such as the Bowling Green University example; Google Maps shows pretty much every building and drive on campus whereas the Apple Maps shows very little by comparison), and frequently inaccurate data all around.
This is a browser plugin so it doesn't use the browser's webpage rendering faculties to display the image. Right-click or disabling javascript wont do anything.
Not saying this can't be defeated, just pointing out you don't understand how this works.
You seem to be confused. YesIAmAScript claims that there are many books in the Apple book store that mention Amazon. If YesIAmAScript claims this then he must have knowledge and thus can tell us which books make mention of Amazon.
DBAN is a bootable CD/USB key. Unless IT has locked down the BIOS and locked down the boot options menu, he can run it regardless of what security measures are in effect in Windows.
I don't think the concept of a union is necessarily bad. I know the long history of the workers rights movement and how badly employees were treated.
However, the states that have the highest rates of union membership tend to be the places that are the most liberal and tend to swing towards being very supportive of workers' rights and interests. Unions have not declined in those states and these are the places where out of control unions are seen the most.
Any mission critical datacenter is going to have refueling contracts with multiple fuel providers to keep their generators fed during an outage.
The logistics of how to maintain fuel service during an extended crisis is left to the fuel provider, but diesel can be hauled across long distances from a non-affected area if needed and brought to the fuel depot where it is in turn loaded onto a refueling truck that goes around to these datacenters every few days to refuel them.
That has never been the justification for use of binding arbitration, at least in any significant way. The primary justification for mandatory binding arbitration is to save the corporations who are frequently the target of ligation the costs of having to defend themselves in court. Nobody is really shy about admitting that since the courts (the real courts) and congress have pretty much given their blessing to the arbitration system.
I don't know how often the RIAA/MPAA actually screw up when sending out these violation notices but I'm going to guess that their accuracy rate is pretty high. The vast majority of people who get caught are guilty. Having to deal with a "strike" is far far better than having to deal with a civil judgement or an out of court settlement. I stand by that statement even though I fully agree that the strikes system lacks any modicum of fairness such as a chance to confront your accuser, a chance to present a rebuttal, call witnesses, present evidence, and etc.
If you go through the court system, you're going to end up losing a lot of money even if you are innocent and get a judgement in your favor. Even if you are granted attorney's fees, which doesn't happen that often, you're still out all the time you wasted in court going through litigation.
But consider this: how likely is it going to be that you not just get one false strike against but a total of six? Extremely unlikely. By the time you start racking up multiple strikes, the statistical odds of you not being guilty of copyright infringement is essentially zero.
The RIAA/MPAA are paying contractors to join bittorrent swarms and collect IP addresses of users sharing infringing content. They don't own the copyright to any Linux distro or Wikipedia distro so they should not be initiating an enforcement action against you for this.
Of course it's entirely possible that they can screw up and get their torrents confused and report everyone who is sharing a 'Wikipedia' repository as somebody sharing the latest Bieber album. In that case, you pretty much have zero recourse because there is no built in appeals process. But you have six strikes at least...
Is that really true? Technically yes, you have your chance at getting due process before the courts.
If you're innocent: you're going to end up having to pay a lawyer and deal with the massively expensive legal system.
If you're guilty: you'll more than likely settle out of court for 3-4 grand, which is likely way more than the supposed losses suffered by the recording industry for your individual act of downloading and sharing.
If you end up in court in either situation and lose, chances are they will go for the full penalty, which can be in excess of $100,000 all for a single album. Sorry, I don't have the court cases at hand here, but I remember Slashdot covering some of these cases where the recording industry was awarded extremely ridiculous sums of money in comparison with a reasonable person's account of their actual damages.
The legal system is stacked against the common person in these situations.
The "6 strikes" system is problematic, yes. But it may end up saving a lot of people from having their wallets drained.
Someone who opens mail envelopes at work that were marked "private" will get fired or even imprisoned. SSL traffic is also marked "private". Why should that be different?
Because there is no legal expectation of privacy at the office. This has been litigated in the past and courts have ruled in favor of the employers.
Slashdot Mirror
That's a design problem. An LCD picture is 100% predictable in terms of the size and position of the picture. LCD monitors don't have options to (un)widen/lengthen/rotate the picture because the picture is an exact representation of the pixels that are sent to the screen. So if the text / arrows on the screen do not line up with the buttons, then it means whoever designed that UI screwed up and did not actually bother to position the elements correctly.
(It could also mean something like there are several different models of ATM in the field and the options/text won't fit properly on some ATMs, again, a UI issue).
This has nothing to do with calibration as there is nothing that is out-of-spec hardware wise.
VMWare's P2V tool will not P2V a UNIXware machine. It can't even P2V a machine running a 2.4.x Linux kernel without some additional hacking.
Who made you the gatekeeper for defining what P2V is defined as?
If I have a physical machine and I virtualize the OS on it, as far as I'm concerned it has been P2V'd.
Curious: have you actually tried virtualizing NTP or do you just think its a bad idea without any experience?
I virtualize ntp for UNIX (build cluster and lab farm) and domain controllers for Windows (which acts as a time server for our 5000 or so desktops at work). Both Microsoft and VMWare explicitly support doing timekeeping functions in their associated hypervisors so long as you follow their guides. No problems whatsoever.
I hope you realize that the internet is going to have much higher latency spikes than your hypervisor will (unless its badly configured or extremely overcommitted).
If you're trying to "correlate logs down to the microsecond" then you should either be using a local time source or should be getting your time from a nearby source on the network.
I'm not sure you understand how hypervisors or NTP really work.
You seem to have a different definition of acknowledgement. They mention clearly that the court ruled as such. I would say that is a pretty clear acknowledgement.
What you're wanting is for Apple to say and admit they were wrong; in other words you're wanting submission. That's a matter of opinion. In the legal world, yeah, Apple lost, but in the hearts and minds of the people running Apple, the courts were wrong and no order or ruling will change how they feel about that. If the court really ordered that (which they did not), how would you enforce that? You would basically be ordering Apple to lie about their own feelings and then you would be ordering them either forever or for some length of time to never contradict those statements.
Regarding time: I don't think you have to build the entire thing all at once. You could construct it over the course of centuries or millennia while still benefiting from the incremental energy output gains you achieve as the build is in progress.
There is no such requirement in America either.
Google closed down their China office because of government harassment, what makes you think that they wouldn't do it in Brazil?
I don't think Google Brazil *can* comply. If Google Brazil is set up anything like how my employer's international entities are set up, they are actually separate and distinct legal entities from the parent company (which is HQ'd in USA) that the parent company has 100% ownership of.
The guy who is in charge of the Brazil office can't effect a decision at the home office.
Brazilian law may deliberately hold executives of foreign subsidiaries responsible for their parent's actions, but from a legal perspective, Brazil has no way to go after the company who actually can effect their demands.
Why didn't Apple negotiate a new deal with Google then?
Did Google refuse to negotiate with Apple or did Apple refuse to negotiate with Google?
It will take far longer than 6 months to catch up to Google. If that's all long it takes, Apple would have got it right it during the beta.
That's a strawman. Nobody says that the 3D deformations are what makes Apple Maps suck, and even if they did, you still haven't proven that Apple Maps are better in this area than Google Maps, you've only established that Google Earth has some examples of similar problems but for all we know they're at a much lower frequency.
There is a whole laundry list of problems that people have been talking about since the iOS 6 beta - things like cities being in the totally wrong place, a lack of detail (such as the Bowling Green University example; Google Maps shows pretty much every building and drive on campus whereas the Apple Maps shows very little by comparison), and frequently inaccurate data all around.
This is a browser plugin so it doesn't use the browser's webpage rendering faculties to display the image. Right-click or disabling javascript wont do anything.
Not saying this can't be defeated, just pointing out you don't understand how this works.
Tapes are easy to move offsite.
So are drives. A 3.5" drive is maybe 1.5 times larger than a tape.
Tapes don't consume any power when not in use.
Neither does a drive.
Tapes are much more resilient than hard drives against environmental factors (mechanical, temperature etc.)
[citation needed]
You seem to be confused. YesIAmAScript claims that there are many books in the Apple book store that mention Amazon. If YesIAmAScript claims this then he must have knowledge and thus can tell us which books make mention of Amazon.
You can if you tell them you had sensitive medical information stored on your PC...
DBAN is a bootable CD/USB key. Unless IT has locked down the BIOS and locked down the boot options menu, he can run it regardless of what security measures are in effect in Windows.
I don't think the concept of a union is necessarily bad. I know the long history of the workers rights movement and how badly employees were treated.
However, the states that have the highest rates of union membership tend to be the places that are the most liberal and tend to swing towards being very supportive of workers' rights and interests. Unions have not declined in those states and these are the places where out of control unions are seen the most.
Any mission critical datacenter is going to have refueling contracts with multiple fuel providers to keep their generators fed during an outage.
The logistics of how to maintain fuel service during an extended crisis is left to the fuel provider, but diesel can be hauled across long distances from a non-affected area if needed and brought to the fuel depot where it is in turn loaded onto a refueling truck that goes around to these datacenters every few days to refuel them.
That has never been the justification for use of binding arbitration, at least in any significant way. The primary justification for mandatory binding arbitration is to save the corporations who are frequently the target of ligation the costs of having to defend themselves in court. Nobody is really shy about admitting that since the courts (the real courts) and congress have pretty much given their blessing to the arbitration system.
I don't know how often the RIAA/MPAA actually screw up when sending out these violation notices but I'm going to guess that their accuracy rate is pretty high. The vast majority of people who get caught are guilty. Having to deal with a "strike" is far far better than having to deal with a civil judgement or an out of court settlement. I stand by that statement even though I fully agree that the strikes system lacks any modicum of fairness such as a chance to confront your accuser, a chance to present a rebuttal, call witnesses, present evidence, and etc.
If you go through the court system, you're going to end up losing a lot of money even if you are innocent and get a judgement in your favor. Even if you are granted attorney's fees, which doesn't happen that often, you're still out all the time you wasted in court going through litigation.
But consider this: how likely is it going to be that you not just get one false strike against but a total of six? Extremely unlikely. By the time you start racking up multiple strikes, the statistical odds of you not being guilty of copyright infringement is essentially zero.
Should have zero impact in theory.
The RIAA/MPAA are paying contractors to join bittorrent swarms and collect IP addresses of users sharing infringing content. They don't own the copyright to any Linux distro or Wikipedia distro so they should not be initiating an enforcement action against you for this.
Of course it's entirely possible that they can screw up and get their torrents confused and report everyone who is sharing a 'Wikipedia' repository as somebody sharing the latest Bieber album. In that case, you pretty much have zero recourse because there is no built in appeals process. But you have six strikes at least...
Is that really true? Technically yes, you have your chance at getting due process before the courts.
If you're innocent: you're going to end up having to pay a lawyer and deal with the massively expensive legal system.
If you're guilty: you'll more than likely settle out of court for 3-4 grand, which is likely way more than the supposed losses suffered by the recording industry for your individual act of downloading and sharing.
If you end up in court in either situation and lose, chances are they will go for the full penalty, which can be in excess of $100,000 all for a single album. Sorry, I don't have the court cases at hand here, but I remember Slashdot covering some of these cases where the recording industry was awarded extremely ridiculous sums of money in comparison with a reasonable person's account of their actual damages.
The legal system is stacked against the common person in these situations.
The "6 strikes" system is problematic, yes. But it may end up saving a lot of people from having their wallets drained.
Someone who opens mail envelopes at work that were marked "private" will get fired or even imprisoned. SSL traffic is also marked "private". Why should that be different?
Because there is no legal expectation of privacy at the office. This has been litigated in the past and courts have ruled in favor of the employers.
SSH can be MITM'd just like SSL.
And if you're using *their* computers, how do you know they aren't running monitoring software on the workstations?