"Wait, is that legal? Has it been legal this whole time?"
Yes, if you don't end up with more readable whole copies than what you started with.
Copyright is a restriction on distributing copies, not making them. Fair use is about distributing a piece of a copy, and how big of a piece should be treated differently than the whole.
So 1) if you bought a book, scanned it, and put the physical book on your shelf while you read the scanned copy, no problem. 2) If you got the book from the library, scanned it into a database where you can't get the full text back out, and took the book back to the library, no problem. 3) If you got the book from the library, scanned it, took the book back to the library, and then read the scanned copy later, you have distributed more copies than are acquired, so that is a copyright infringement.
The article isn't questioning the reviews themselves at all. It questioned Fandango's rounding method, which presents higher averages than other sites would with the same review ratings.
Facebook does not require use of your real name, it requires compliance with their Real Names policy which in some cases prohibits users from using their actual real name.
If reduction in labor required for agricultural production could cause economic collapse, it would have happened by now since most of the reduction has already occurred.
The central premise of a sitcom is the character thinks "Everyone is an idiot except me". Since we eventually get a POV form every character, that means that everyone is an idiot.
Yes, the IT Crowd has even cheaper stereotypes: women can't cope with computers; management does nothing; IT workers are either slovenly men with poor social skills or OCD men with poor social skills.
However, I think implication was that cheap stereotype are bad.
People hate this show because they cannot cope with the idea that the problems that geeks have are basically a lot like the problems non-geeks have, e.g. communication problems in relationships, wage disparity between spouses, job change leading to existential crises.
Most readers can stop right there, as you have admitted you don't know what you are talking about.
However, they way you can tell during viewing whether production tried to manipulate the laughter is to look for cases where the next line is laughed over or if the next line was delayed for the laughter. If the writers actually had the ability to prevent the audience from stepping on their precious dialog they would have used it.
Slashdot Mirror
"How does allowing google to scan and display the books for their own financial gain."
They are not displaying the books scanned by this work. They are indexing them.
The important detail is that Google is not making readable copies of the books, they are making an index.
How many indexes do you think it is work making?
"Wait, is that legal? Has it been legal this whole time?"
Yes, if you don't end up with more readable whole copies than what you started with.
Copyright is a restriction on distributing copies, not making them. Fair use is about distributing a piece of a copy, and how big of a piece should be treated differently than the whole.
So 1) if you bought a book, scanned it, and put the physical book on your shelf while you read the scanned copy, no problem. 2) If you got the book from the library, scanned it into a database where you can't get the full text back out, and took the book back to the library, no problem. 3) If you got the book from the library, scanned it, took the book back to the library, and then read the scanned copy later, you have distributed more copies than are acquired, so that is a copyright infringement.
What Google wants to do is 2).
The article isn't questioning the reviews themselves at all. It questioned Fandango's rounding method, which presents higher averages than other sites would with the same review ratings.
The phone's camera and GPS mean you don't have to depend on the user to verbally describe the problem and location.
I am aware of exactly where all of Intel's fabs are, as well as the difference between a fab and an assembly and test plant.
If wafers come out, it's a fab; if wafers go in, it's assembly and test.
"fab plant"
Assembly and test plant. Intel has no fabs in Costa Rica, Philippines, Malaysia, or Vietnam.
Actually, they don't have an assembly and test plant in Costa Rica any more, either.
a) No effective sizes are reliable.
b) At Node N it is even money whether there is any dimension, drawn or effective, that is actually N.
"You seem to imply that die shrink is completely fictitious because of naming."
No, but I am plainly stating that there is not necessarily anything of dimension N in process node N.
That's the difference between software engineering and mere programming. ;-)
"tests of a pair of 6s Plus phones"
You can't argue with the statistical validity of that analysis... because there isn't any.
The fact that one process is called 16nm and one is called 14nm tells you almost nothing about the relative sizes of equivalent features.
These days, a process is called "14nm" because the previous one was called "20nm" and the next is going to be called "10nm".
"Why is that kind of information on the bar code at all?"
So that you can still board and dispatch planes rather than let a 5 minute network fault in Chicago causing flight delays across the country.
-1 irrelevant.
Facebook does not require use of your real name, it requires compliance with their Real Names policy which in some cases prohibits users from using their actual real name.
If reduction in labor required for agricultural production could cause economic collapse, it would have happened by now since most of the reduction has already occurred.
"it's like a lot of other sitcoms"
The central premise of a sitcom is the character thinks "Everyone is an idiot except me". Since we eventually get a POV form every character, that means that everyone is an idiot.
So he creates an argument made entirely of strawmen, and wonders why doe doesn't get taken seriously?
Linus should grow a thicker skin. If he really didn't think criticism was valid, he shouldn't get so upset about it.
"Why should we expect otherwise?"
The ghetto walls are enforced from within.
Yes, the IT Crowd has even cheaper stereotypes: women can't cope with computers; management does nothing; IT workers are either slovenly men with poor social skills or OCD men with poor social skills.
However, I think implication was that cheap stereotype are bad.
People hate this show because they cannot cope with the idea that the problems that geeks have are basically a lot like the problems non-geeks have, e.g. communication problems in relationships, wage disparity between spouses, job change leading to existential crises.
" I don't know if they actually do this"
Most readers can stop right there, as you have admitted you don't know what you are talking about.
However, they way you can tell during viewing whether production tried to manipulate the laughter is to look for cases where the next line is laughed over or if the next line was delayed for the laughter. If the writers actually had the ability to prevent the audience from stepping on their precious dialog they would have used it.
"You know how many threads there are defending / promoting the notion that i devices are impervious to malware / viruses?"
None. It is a strawman invoked here on /. only by Apple detractors.
"Doubtlessly to be released to public 24 hours before the Congressional vote"
That would actually an improvement. Last I heard it was going to remain secret after ratification.
Beware of the leopard.
"The only way to stop that from happening is to somehow make the cooling tower environment a less friendly one for the bugs."
Like disinfecting them, as was recently done?