Here's the situation:
Apple has an agreement with the publishers that says "No one is permitted to sell for less than this."
In other words, they tell potential ebook sellers "Sure you can try to compete, but don't think you can sell more / establish yourself / give consumers a better deal by selling at a lower price."
Now, here's the purpose of the Sherman Antitrust Act:
"To protect the consumers by preventing arrangements designed, or which tend, to advance the cost of goods to the consumer."
Sounds pretty obvious that what Apple is doing is an example of what the Sherman Antitrust Act is about, doesn't it?
And here's how the law starts:
Every contract, combination in the form of trust or otherwise, or conspiracy, in restraint of trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations, is hereby declared to be illegal.
+1 Informative--if I didn't want to comment, I'd mod you up. All the following is based on my own minimal involvement with CSLUG (now dormant).
Step #1 is talk to professors and potentially interested students. Get a schedule that works for as many interested students as possible, and preferably one that allows at least one professor to attend.
Don't say "Tuesday June 11" in your posters, say "Second Tuesday every month"--you want them to know that it will be happening same place and time.
Arrange at least one installfest (where someone who doesn't know Linux can walk away with a fully configured Linux install, all hardware working) per semester; I would consider a university LUG that can't manage that to be dormant or dying. If you aren't getting more Linux users, how do you expect more members?
For fun, LAN parties may be appropriate. Announcing non-school approved activities should be permitted but only after the meeting is adjourned.
LUG meetings should provide something interesting for Linux users. Of course, this means asking. Some examples I'm aware of are presentations like these: -Walk through installing and configuring a server (eg, Apache + PHP) -Hardening a server -Cross-compiling (eg, PC to Raspberry Pi = Lintel to armv6) -Less well-known features of popular software (at Chico, vi/vim was essentially something you could not avoid; a presentation on semi-advanced Vim commands was the most popular one there). -if someone finds something relatively unknown, they should be able to present on it as long as enough people (4-5 minimum) are interested.
Try to get a relatively well-known speaker there occasionally. If you can find something that you could collaborate with another club on, by all means do so. And if there happens to be an event involving multiple LUGs, go.
Thanks for pointing that out...I was wondering if I would need to. One of my brothers has what is currently diagnosed as schizophrenia, since he started coming up with stories that had no connection to reality. These are all "memories" of events that didn't happen, with few or no hallucinations. Before that, they called it Asperger's or high-functioning autism; supposedly, the presence or absence of delusions and hallucinations is what differentiates those.
Now, I'm inclined to figure that a system that can change its diagnosis completely on manifestation of a new symptom, and differentiates solely on the basis of one set of characteristics, is labeling rather than classifying. If someone autistic developed an unrelated problem causing hallucinations (got ergot in their bread? ended up getting fumes of the wrong stuff?), suddenly they aren't autistic, they're schizo--but who can show that you're not seeing the intersection of autism and something else? Oh right, I forgot:
The strength of each of the editions of DSM has been âoereliabilityâ â" each edition has ensured that clinicians use the same terms in the same ways. The weakness is its lack of validity.
If I were asked to decrypt a device purported to be my own, here's more-or-less what I'd (like to) say:
I cannot verify that the devices in question are mine; I do not and did not have exclusive access to my devices, so there may well be files that are present solely because of the actions of a third party without my knowledge; and further, if it were mine, I would likely not remember the password--I construct my passwords so that they are not readily remembered without frequent use, and have found that a week without access is usually too long to remember.
In real life right now, I'd have to answer: Your Honor, the device cannot possibly be mine, unless someone else has accessed it since I last did; although I have some awareness of cryptography, I have not encrypted any devices.
And here's what I'd love to see someone be able to say (after the first response)... My own devices are encrypted using a custom setup which is sensitive to the hardware and OS; only the original drive can be decrypted in the original computer; it can only decrypt if it has read-write access to the drive, which it tests by overwriting certain sectors, and it may overwrite depending on several factors. The software included an option which would render it inaccessible or even delete it on several events such as unclean shutdowns (the computer being powered off without a precise sequence being followed), and options to re-encrypt it automatically based on several factors; I forget whether I enabled that, and the configuration cannot be changed without accessing the encrypted portion. The software was modified by myself; I forget whether I deleted the modified code or moved it to one of the encrypted volumes. I do not expect that I could duplicate and suitably modify the software myself without access to the source code as I used it; the source was of such a complexity that memorizing the constitution would be easier.
The NASA article explicitly states that it probably isn't cold fusion. Instead, they think it's a process (LENR) whereby a neutron gets absorbed, then a neutron splits.
Choice quotes from the NASA article:
âoeFrom my perspective, this is still a physics experiment,â Zawodny said. âoeI'm interested in understanding whether the phenomenon is real, what it's all about. Then the next step is to develop the rules for engineering. Once you have that, I'm going to let the engineers have all the fun.â
And he is sure that if the Widom-Larsen theory is shown to be correct, resources to support the necessary technological breakthroughs will come flooding in. âoeAll we really need is that one bit of irrefutable, reproducible proof that we have a system that works,â Zawodny said. âoeAs soon as you have that, everybody is going to throw their assets at it. And then I want to buy one of these things and put it in my house.â
As far as I can tell, the glass is the OTP. Copying it is possible, but you need 24 hours (using current techniques). So Eve has to (a) get it for a day, and copy it, or (b) get physical access to it after obtaining the message, before the message becomes irrelevant.
I dont think its a fallacy to point out that NOONE has managed to make faster processors than x86-64 arch ones in years despite claims that there are superior processor arches. Appeal to authority is not necessarily a fallacy if all of the biggest authorities in the field agree.
First, the "fallacy" referred to was along the lines of "let's see you do better," which is certainly not the same as "nobody has done better." Second, best != fastest clock. MIPS and ARM can be done in a fraction of the silicon, have simpler ISAs, and use much less power at comparable technologies. And no, "Intel can make it at 22 nm when everyone else is at 32 nm or higher" (may be slightly out of date by now) is not a valid reason for saying "x86-64 is the best arch there is." Third, this is false unless you count overclocked prcessors. You say NOONE, I say IBM had POWER6 up to 5.00 GHz in 2008. According to this page,
As of mid-2013, the highest clock rate on a production processor is the IBM zEC12, clocked at 5.5 GHz, which was released in August of 2012.
Make that 5x (Qemu is usually 20% of native), and you'd be fairly accurate. The "average higher-end" ARM device is 1.2-1.5 GHz (ie, I see numbers in that range quoted a lot), so let's suppose a dual-core 1.2 GHz Cortex A7. NOTE! All of the numbers in this calculation are ones I could find in a couple minutes on Google. It's only a rough estimate.
That's around 2.5 DMIPS/MHz, which is roughly 5-10% less than the purported performance of the Pineview (I haven't found numbers more recent than that), so hypothetically it should be 60-70% of the performance except that hyperthreading won't give you as much of a boost as dual-core, making it roughly equal to an Atom...but ignore that little bit for a while and calculate what we need for emulation: 1.2 GHz * (100%/20%) * 90% = 5.4 GHz So if you're using an Atom, you would need it clocked faster than any stock x86 chip in existence to match an ARM tablet. The 90% is to make up for an Atom being possibly 10% faster at the same clock. Now if you used qemu-arm, that might drop to 3 GHz, which is still far faster than any Atom out there. The numbers will be different if you stick a Core i in there, but who's doing that and running Android?
It's just that, against implacable electronics that are totally indifferent to anything except being insulated by the uncounted bodies of the slain, this tactic doesn't work very well(see also: mammals that 'freeze' to avoid predators; but discover that cars aren't visual hunters; but they do kill anything that gets in their way)...
Ah, but it does work well. When it stops working or is insulated in dead ants, the ants have done their job.
24 years old, I use IRC less now than a few months ago...I started on it thanks to OpenCDE.
I've used alpine, but it's too slow; I prefer mutt. It's much faster to get mails that way.
Lynx I have also used, but I prefer Links2, which I've used in both text and GUI modes. It's really the best way to view some web sites--especially some "Web 2.0/30" type websites that use Javascript like they're on an allnighter and have flash/video, irrelevant graphics, and all sorts of other non-content.
Also I find that I can often get better download speeds via Links.
Shoot from...265 feet? I guess you have no idea about ranges; if you did, you'd be using yards or meters. This is the line of rifles that someone could hit the target dead on at 1000 yards, when they had not fired a gun previously, while TFS mentions 500 yard ranges. And 90 yards may be hard for someone who never picked up a rifle before, but with practice it's very close.
But yes, I can see it being desirable for assassinations, except for how obvious it is as a weapon. You might kill them, but there's no way you'll hide something like that.
That means that prime numbers are an open set, since an infinite number of prime pairs with a finite difference means an infinite number of prime numbers.
In other words: If you wanted to be recognized for finding the highest prime number, you can stop your computer now. There is no highest prime. But if you only care for a temporary entry, go ahead; you may well find one in a search of only 70 million numbers!
(As others have pointed out) drunk driving != deaths from alcohol. I'm fine with quoting "all firearm-related deaths", but how about you compare that with "all alcohol related deaths"? http://www.cdc.gov/alcohol/fact-sheets/alcohol-use.htm says approximately 80,000 alcohol-related deaths per year.
On second thought, this is the country that thinks so little of mass shootings in schools that they refuse to regulate the access to firearms. Deaths on the road due to drunk drivers is nothing when compared to that.
There are actually far fewer deaths due to firearms than due to alcohol, as mentioned previously.
If I remember right, at first I copied it over to a Windows 2000 desktop (which according to corporate policy really shouldn't have been there...) via flash drive, and uploaded from there with IE6; later I used the ftp://hostname.com/ method with IE7...which is really something that should never be used, in terms of security. But on the other hand, doesn't that describe Microsoft in general?
Some little thing...like browser FTP uploads when you can't install Firefox or an FTP client. And you discover that Microsoft broke FTP login in IE7 when you have a 150 MB file with all the data that the soil moisture sensors should have sent over the data link automatically, but the network didn't work for one reason or another and the scientists on the other side of the country NEED the data THIS WEEK, and the only way to get it there is to somehow transfer it to the monitoring company you work with from the other side of the world, who can merge it in manually, but email is no option and the only alternative is FTP. (2009, me, an intern at a certain large company which shall remain unnamed for the present, working with the products of an irrigation company which shall remain nameless.)
Slashdot Mirror
There, FTFY.
Just to be pedantic, you were correct about him, but you did need one.
Apple has an agreement with the publishers that says "No one is permitted to sell for less than this."
In other words, they tell potential ebook sellers "Sure you can try to compete, but don't think you can sell more / establish yourself / give consumers a better deal by selling at a lower price."
Now, here's the purpose of the Sherman Antitrust Act:
"To protect the consumers by preventing arrangements designed, or which tend, to advance the cost of goods to the consumer."
Sounds pretty obvious that what Apple is doing is an example of what the Sherman Antitrust Act is about, doesn't it?
And here's how the law starts:
http://books.google.com/books?id=biU3AAAAIAAJ&pg=PA209
+1 Informative--if I didn't want to comment, I'd mod you up.
All the following is based on my own minimal involvement with CSLUG (now dormant).
Step #1 is talk to professors and potentially interested students.
Get a schedule that works for as many interested students as possible, and preferably one that allows at least one professor to attend.
Don't say "Tuesday June 11" in your posters, say "Second Tuesday every month"--you want them to know that it will be happening same place and time.
Arrange at least one installfest (where someone who doesn't know Linux can walk away with a fully configured Linux install, all hardware working) per semester; I would consider a university LUG that can't manage that to be dormant or dying. If you aren't getting more Linux users, how do you expect more members?
For fun, LAN parties may be appropriate.
Announcing non-school approved activities should be permitted but only after the meeting is adjourned.
LUG meetings should provide something interesting for Linux users. Of course, this means asking. Some examples I'm aware of are presentations like these:
-Walk through installing and configuring a server (eg, Apache + PHP)
-Hardening a server
-Cross-compiling (eg, PC to Raspberry Pi = Lintel to armv6)
-Less well-known features of popular software (at Chico, vi/vim was essentially something you could not avoid; a presentation on semi-advanced Vim commands was the most popular one there).
-if someone finds something relatively unknown, they should be able to present on it as long as enough people (4-5 minimum) are interested.
Try to get a relatively well-known speaker there occasionally.
If you can find something that you could collaborate with another club on, by all means do so.
And if there happens to be an event involving multiple LUGs, go.
I'm amazed: it seems everyone missed the key cause.
How would you not see higher fatalities with a skeleton crew?
Thanks for pointing that out...I was wondering if I would need to.
One of my brothers has what is currently diagnosed as schizophrenia, since he started coming up with stories that had no connection to reality. These are all "memories" of events that didn't happen, with few or no hallucinations.
Before that, they called it Asperger's or high-functioning autism; supposedly, the presence or absence of delusions and hallucinations is what differentiates those.
Now, I'm inclined to figure that a system that can change its diagnosis completely on manifestation of a new symptom, and differentiates solely on the basis of one set of characteristics, is labeling rather than classifying. If someone autistic developed an unrelated problem causing hallucinations (got ergot in their bread? ended up getting fumes of the wrong stuff?), suddenly they aren't autistic, they're schizo--but who can show that you're not seeing the intersection of autism and something else? Oh right, I forgot:
If I were asked to decrypt a device purported to be my own, here's more-or-less what I'd (like to) say:
I cannot verify that the devices in question are mine; I do not and did not have exclusive access to my devices, so there may well be files that are present solely because of the actions of a third party without my knowledge; and further, if it were mine, I would likely not remember the password--I construct my passwords so that they are not readily remembered without frequent use, and have found that a week without access is usually too long to remember.
In real life right now, I'd have to answer:
Your Honor, the device cannot possibly be mine, unless someone else has accessed it since I last did; although I have some awareness of cryptography, I have not encrypted any devices.
And here's what I'd love to see someone be able to say (after the first response)...
My own devices are encrypted using a custom setup which is sensitive to the hardware and OS; only the original drive can be decrypted in the original computer; it can only decrypt if it has read-write access to the drive, which it tests by overwriting certain sectors, and it may overwrite depending on several factors. The software included an option which would render it inaccessible or even delete it on several events such as unclean shutdowns (the computer being powered off without a precise sequence being followed), and options to re-encrypt it automatically based on several factors; I forget whether I enabled that, and the configuration cannot be changed without accessing the encrypted portion. The software was modified by myself; I forget whether I deleted the modified code or moved it to one of the encrypted volumes.
I do not expect that I could duplicate and suitably modify the software myself without access to the source code as I used it; the source was of such a complexity that memorizing the constitution would be easier.
It's the "home court advantage".
Never call a telephone company about your plan.
And never email an ISP.
The NASA article explicitly states that it probably isn't cold fusion. Instead, they think it's a process (LENR) whereby a neutron gets absorbed, then a neutron splits.
Choice quotes from the NASA article:
As far as I can tell, the glass is the OTP.
Copying it is possible, but you need 24 hours (using current techniques).
So Eve has to (a) get it for a day, and copy it, or (b) get physical access to it after obtaining the message, before the message becomes irrelevant.
Mostly because anyone who ends up leading the planet won't be benevolent.
+1 Punny.
Only if you want to sell it.
First, the "fallacy" referred to was along the lines of "let's see you do better," which is certainly not the same as "nobody has done better."
Second, best != fastest clock. MIPS and ARM can be done in a fraction of the silicon, have simpler ISAs, and use much less power at comparable technologies. And no, "Intel can make it at 22 nm when everyone else is at 32 nm or higher" (may be slightly out of date by now) is not a valid reason for saying "x86-64 is the best arch there is."
Third, this is false unless you count overclocked prcessors. You say NOONE, I say IBM had POWER6 up to 5.00 GHz in 2008.
According to this page,
Make that 5x (Qemu is usually 20% of native), and you'd be fairly accurate.
The "average higher-end" ARM device is 1.2-1.5 GHz (ie, I see numbers in that range quoted a lot), so let's suppose a dual-core 1.2 GHz Cortex A7.
NOTE! All of the numbers in this calculation are ones I could find in a couple minutes on Google. It's only a rough estimate.
That's around 2.5 DMIPS/MHz, which is roughly 5-10% less than the purported performance of the Pineview (I haven't found numbers more recent than that), so hypothetically it should be 60-70% of the performance except that hyperthreading won't give you as much of a boost as dual-core, making it roughly equal to an Atom...but ignore that little bit for a while and calculate what we need for emulation:
1.2 GHz * (100%/20%) * 90% = 5.4 GHz
So if you're using an Atom, you would need it clocked faster than any stock x86 chip in existence to match an ARM tablet.
The 90% is to make up for an Atom being possibly 10% faster at the same clock.
Now if you used qemu-arm, that might drop to 3 GHz, which is still far faster than any Atom out there.
The numbers will be different if you stick a Core i in there, but who's doing that and running Android?
And what about the fact that Atoms are in barely any Android products?
(Typed on my Atom netbook running Linux.)
Ah, but it does work well. When it stops working or is insulated in dead ants, the ants have done their job.
So you're worried about bees pollinating water pump pressure switches now?
Or was that just a word allergy?
24 years old, I use IRC less now than a few months ago...I started on it thanks to OpenCDE. I've used alpine, but it's too slow; I prefer mutt. It's much faster to get mails that way.
Lynx I have also used, but I prefer Links2, which I've used in both text and GUI modes. It's really the best way to view some web sites--especially some "Web 2.0/30" type websites that use Javascript like they're on an allnighter and have flash/video, irrelevant graphics, and all sorts of other non-content. Also I find that I can often get better download speeds via Links.
Shoot from...265 feet? I guess you have no idea about ranges; if you did, you'd be using yards or meters.
This is the line of rifles that someone could hit the target dead on at 1000 yards, when they had not fired a gun previously, while TFS mentions 500 yard ranges.
And 90 yards may be hard for someone who never picked up a rifle before, but with practice it's very close.
But yes, I can see it being desirable for assassinations, except for how obvious it is as a weapon. You might kill them, but there's no way you'll hide something like that.
That means that prime numbers are an open set, since an infinite number of prime pairs with a finite difference means an infinite number of prime numbers.
In other words: If you wanted to be recognized for finding the highest prime number, you can stop your computer now. There is no highest prime.
But if you only care for a temporary entry, go ahead; you may well find one in a search of only 70 million numbers!
(As others have pointed out)
drunk driving != deaths from alcohol.
I'm fine with quoting "all firearm-related deaths", but how about you compare that with "all alcohol related deaths"?
http://www.cdc.gov/alcohol/fact-sheets/alcohol-use.htm says approximately 80,000 alcohol-related deaths per year.
There are actually far fewer deaths due to firearms than due to alcohol, as mentioned previously.
In theory, the perfect case.
In practice, you have Windows + restricted software access + a separate company that uses FTP.
If I remember right, at first I copied it over to a Windows 2000 desktop (which according to corporate policy really shouldn't have been there...) via flash drive, and uploaded from there with IE6; later I used the ftp://hostname.com/ method with IE7...which is really something that should never be used, in terms of security. But on the other hand, doesn't that describe Microsoft in general?
Some little thing...like browser FTP uploads when you can't install Firefox or an FTP client.
And you discover that Microsoft broke FTP login in IE7 when you have a 150 MB file with all the data that the soil moisture sensors should have sent over the data link automatically, but the network didn't work for one reason or another and the scientists on the other side of the country NEED the data THIS WEEK, and the only way to get it there is to somehow transfer it to the monitoring company you work with from the other side of the world, who can merge it in manually, but email is no option and the only alternative is FTP.
(2009, me, an intern at a certain large company which shall remain unnamed for the present, working with the products of an irrigation company which shall remain nameless.)