Had they stopped selling oil, you would them claim they are patronizing importer countries by not letting them make the "incorrect" decision to keep using oil. Conveniently, you would be able to accuse them of a moral failing no matter what choice they made.
Or maybe they recognize that in some areas it is easier to convert to non-gas infrastructure than others and that it is reasonable to convert in the easier places first while continuing to use gas-powered cars in other areas.
Normal human beings do not maintain a racer's pace if they are not actually racing.
A 3 mph walk will burn ~60 watts, which will get you 9 mph on a bicycle without being any more sweaty than walking for the same amount of time. Do you need a shower after walking from your car into the building where you work?
It is a scam only in the sense that *no semiconductor manufacturer* has used the node name to represent any particular dimension of that node for years. 10nm just means comes after 16/14nm and before 7nm.
The Appellate Court stipulated that APIs are copyrightable when they remanded the case back to the lower court. Not argument that they are not copyrightable is being entertained in this court. They have to get back to the Appellate Court to challenge that stipulation.
The judge did not say he didn't know what GNU stands for. It is counsel's job to present the evidence for what GNU stands for, not the judge.
The judge said the definition as stated doesn't make sense, which is correct. To explain the definition of GNU you must also have an explanation of recursion. In conversation between experts the definition of recursion is assumed as given, but for the trial it must also be entered into evidence.
One of the big problems of this trial is that different people are using different definitions of terms like API, declaration, etc. Getting counsel to clearly and completely back up their usage is part of the judges job.
"I didn't realize airports were allowed to fire the TSA and go back to their own security, but I don't understand why all airports don't do this right now!"
They can replace TSA screeners, but TSA still sets the policies which are the actual problem.
A slight modification that I would suggest is to pass people by random number generator with a dynamically scaled threshold. This prevents a DoS by just packing the line with a sudden surge of confederates, and it also normalized the fact that some people don't get searched at all.
All of those are problems with storing data in a single location, whether or no that one location is "the cloud". All of those are mitigated by storing in more than one location, whether or not one of those locations is "the cloud".
If I walk into a store and buy a product off a shelf, there's little controversy over where the sale takes place*.
However, if order a book from Amazon and it is sent from California to Oregon, in which state has the sale occurred? From Oregon to California? How about if I order from Amazon.co.uk and it ships from Manchester? Is it the same answer or different if I buy an ebook and download to the US? What if I download form Amazon.co.uk to a machine in the UK then move it from there to the USA?
If I purchase cloud storage from Microsoft in a data center in Ireland, have I bought it from Microsoft USA or Microsoft Ireland?
The thing about using address of the HQ is that everyone can (mostly) agree on where it is.
*Even here, there can be a problem is a jurisdictional boundary crosses through the building.
"If you have a sharp rise in demand and neither supply nor price can surge, you get an inefficient allocation."
If price can surge but supply cannot, it is still an inefficient allocation.
"The extra money goes to Uber and the drivers so it's not a middle-man capturing it."
Uber is by definition the middleman. They control all transactions with the customers and all transactions with the suppliers. They exercise monopoly and monopsony pricing power.
Q is Quantity, the X-axis when plotting supply and demand curves.
The way a market is supposed to work is that if demand increases, i.e. the demand curve shifts left, intersection of demand a supply is now at a point of both higher quantity and higher price. However, if the supply curve is moved upward, then you get higher prices with no increased supply. This is the difference between allocative efficiency and price gouging.
a) a totally corrupt bench that will rubber-stamp any request put before the court, b) a clueless bench that doesn't know when it is being lied to, b) a good-faith effort by law-enforcement to err on the side of protecting civil rights by not presenting any requests that are even slightly questionable, c) risk-adverse law-enforcement that is motivated more by avoiding the hassle of any challenged request than by defending rights or investigating crimes, or d) over-worked law-enforcement that has more cases than they can investigate, so they triage based on ability to proceed?
Slashdot Mirror
Why do you think that comparing a quantity with a rate is a meaningful economic metric?
Why do you think that 60% is a large value for that metric ?
Had they stopped selling oil, you would them claim they are patronizing importer countries by not letting them make the "incorrect" decision to keep using oil. Conveniently, you would be able to accuse them of a moral failing no matter what choice they made.
Or maybe they recognize that in some areas it is easier to convert to non-gas infrastructure than others and that it is reasonable to convert in the easier places first while continuing to use gas-powered cars in other areas.
Most of the back catalog is utter crap, too.
Normal human beings do not maintain a racer's pace if they are not actually racing.
A 3 mph walk will burn ~60 watts, which will get you 9 mph on a bicycle without being any more sweaty than walking for the same amount of time. Do you need a shower after walking from your car into the building where you work?
"to sell you a less expensive TV"
-1, irrelevant
They are putting ads on *already sold units*.
"Amazon are utterly immoral and it is ethical to do whatever possible to reduce their value."
Arsonists exists, therefore we should pre-emptively burn everything down.
"The whole 10nm rating is a scam."
It is a scam only in the sense that *no semiconductor manufacturer* has used the node name to represent any particular dimension of that node for years. 10nm just means comes after 16/14nm and before 7nm.
Be careful of mistaking a judge who is unaware for a judge that is letting counsel have enough rope to hang themselves.
-1, irrelevant
The Appellate Court stipulated that APIs are copyrightable when they remanded the case back to the lower court. Not argument that they are not copyrightable is being entertained in this court. They have to get back to the Appellate Court to challenge that stipulation.
The judge did not say he didn't know what GNU stands for. It is counsel's job to present the evidence for what GNU stands for, not the judge.
The judge said the definition as stated doesn't make sense, which is correct. To explain the definition of GNU you must also have an explanation of recursion. In conversation between experts the definition of recursion is assumed as given, but for the trial it must also be entered into evidence.
One of the big problems of this trial is that different people are using different definitions of terms like API, declaration, etc. Getting counsel to clearly and completely back up their usage is part of the judges job.
"I didn't realize airports were allowed to fire the TSA and go back to their own security, but I don't understand why all airports don't do this right now!"
They can replace TSA screeners, but TSA still sets the policies which are the actual problem.
A slight modification that I would suggest is to pass people by random number generator with a dynamically scaled threshold. This prevents a DoS by just packing the line with a sudden surge of confederates, and it also normalized the fact that some people don't get searched at all.
If you are shown a demand curve sloping downward and you call it witchcraft, you may not be a capitalist.
All of those are problems with storing data in a single location, whether or no that one location is "the cloud".
All of those are mitigated by storing in more than one location, whether or not one of those locations is "the cloud".
"The cloud" isn't what makes them problems.
If I walk into a store and buy a product off a shelf, there's little controversy over where the sale takes place*.
However, if order a book from Amazon and it is sent from California to Oregon, in which state has the sale occurred? From Oregon to California? How about if I order from Amazon.co.uk and it ships from Manchester? Is it the same answer or different if I buy an ebook and download to the US? What if I download form Amazon.co.uk to a machine in the UK then move it from there to the USA?
If I purchase cloud storage from Microsoft in a data center in Ireland, have I bought it from Microsoft USA or Microsoft Ireland?
The thing about using address of the HQ is that everyone can (mostly) agree on where it is.
*Even here, there can be a problem is a jurisdictional boundary crosses through the building.
"If you have a sharp rise in demand and neither supply nor price can surge, you get an inefficient allocation."
If price can surge but supply cannot, it is still an inefficient allocation.
"The extra money goes to Uber and the drivers so it's not a middle-man capturing it."
Uber is by definition the middleman. They control all transactions with the customers and all transactions with the suppliers. They exercise monopoly and monopsony pricing power.
Q is Quantity, the X-axis when plotting supply and demand curves.
The way a market is supposed to work is that if demand increases, i.e. the demand curve shifts left, intersection of demand a supply is now at a point of both higher quantity and higher price. However, if the supply curve is moved upward, then you get higher prices with no increased supply. This is the difference between allocative efficiency and price gouging.
"Surge pricing is just supply and demand."
Surge pricing is just supply and demand if Q actually increases. Otherwise it is just the middleman capturing the surplus.
Pneumatic starting is actually pretty common for large diesel engines.
"Things like Kale aren't cheap. The produce sections of places like Whole Foods can drain your whole wallet."
Since the non-produce sections of places like Whole Foods can also drain your wallet, I submit that kale is no tthe problem.
I'm not willing to concede that there's no catch in this...
Sherry Glied's introduction to the debate provides the context for the debate.
It's hard to come up with a clear reason why my strawman arguement that bears no relation to the actual situation doesn't shut down all dispute.
I'd love to have a failure like "sold more watches than Switzerland".
How do you distinguish between:
a) a totally corrupt bench that will rubber-stamp any request put before the court,
b) a clueless bench that doesn't know when it is being lied to,
b) a good-faith effort by law-enforcement to err on the side of protecting civil rights by not presenting any requests that are even slightly questionable,
c) risk-adverse law-enforcement that is motivated more by avoiding the hassle of any challenged request than by defending rights or investigating crimes, or
d) over-worked law-enforcement that has more cases than they can investigate, so they triage based on ability to proceed?