Not to hear them whinge about it. Each used sale takes money away from them in their own whines and words. Because if they could keep you from buying the used copy, they could sell you the new one (If I'm disinterested in spending the money, no, you wouldn't- but they don't see things that way...)...
Bingo! Not sharing that you found nothing means you're trying to hide things...
It is a requirement, though not often followed in any endeavor these days, to show your "homework" for a given conclusion or set thereof.
Doesn't matter if you're talking a Law, or a bit of Physics research.
Hiding things or discounting them because they don't provide you conclusive answers is not science, law, or the like- it's merely religion in other clothing.
Copyright is an artificial, government backed monopoly on the publication and distribution of a "protected" work.
You are not assured of any money whatsoever. Ever. The LGP edition of Ballistics from Grin, SE proved that out to me. Even if there wasn't the 5-10k units of pirated versions on The Pirate Bay out there, the thing probably wouldn't have been much more sold for Linux.
Not because of the Linux market's "small". I know better. You appear to not. Not because of the piracy, though that didn't help. I know better. You appear to not.
It was because we couldn't price the thing to what the market, at that time, could willingly bear. People would point to the bargain-bin priced Windows version and ask why they should spend $40 when it's available for $5, with the understanding that it only ran so-so under WINE. Seriously.
People will pay you what they believe it is worth. I know this because I saw some small, but real amounts of money from my participation with the Humble Indie Bundle #2. No DRM. No BS. Pay me what you thought this was worth or donate it all to charity- or somewhere in-between. It's my right and desire to control how it's shipped, copied, etc. within the limits allowed me by law for things, relative to work for hire, etc. that I agree to. But, to say what you said? X-D
Do you have IP, which is to say, creative works protected by Copyright or Patent? I. Do. As a rights holder, I can tell you that the rights are only worth the amount you are legally able to pursue enforcement of the same. Unless you're a big, big corporation, there's some hard limits on your rights there- because you don't have the finances and all to defend the same. Legally speaking, your only position (hint: Morality doesn't even factor into this...) is to not use the works in question. Morally? You should abide by the law so long as it's not wrong/evil. DMCA? Probably wrong/evil. Copyright? You have fair use exemptions, which in many cases people "stealing" it all fall under. And, it's not theft. It's infringing on your right to control publication and distribution. Again...no assurances of money. No assurances of people doing the legally right thing...ever.
Morality? This varies between persons and what faiths and beliefs they hold. I don't hold yours...why should I let you dictate to me that? (Oh, WAIT... I don't,)
Heh... Since many know they did this...I question the "quality" of anything that they provide. I don't even bother contemplating paying for their shit. I see if I can find comparable or the actual article published by the school, etc. that did the work. Oftentimes, there's as good or better than at Elsevier.
This doesn't even get into the reality that 70% of all the "computers" are embedded beasties...all those "IoT" processors and the bulk of them are programmed in C or C++. A Node.JS or Python option is available, but neither of those are what you'd call "secure". You might be able to get Go to "go" onto those platforms or Swift- but they're a bit largish and don't really target the small stuff.
The remark about.Net or Java means they're a real Headupassian. No clue whatsoever what they're managing- and it sadly shows.
Bingo. People keep presuming things that they shouldn't. LiFi's a consume only thing in the large. It's not as useful as people believe it to be. As I said earlier on this discussion for TFA- this is a solution looking for problems to solve.
Heh. They're using DC strip lights with an AC->DC power supply and possibly a bit of intelligence on top of the constant current switcher.
Thing is, if you're doing the converter at the room level, you're still using 110 mains, etc. This doesn't gain you anything. LiFi is intriguing (in that it took them this long to "get" there) but it's limited in what it can/can't do... It's a solution looking for problems to solve.
People keep fallaciously saying this... If it makes you feel better, by all means keep repeating it to yourself. You don't
1) Understand HOW a President gets elected (Seriously- if you mention "popular vote" in this context, you DO NOT KNOW.) 2) Understand that it's not what YOU wish, but what a lot of other people think that you clearly know nothing about.
While I didn't agree with the man's take on things, I thought Romney was going to take it because of anti-Dem fervor back then. Clearly I was wrong. Pontificating like you have here, you're likely to be that too. Just don't act shocked, pissed, etc. when it doesn't work out that way. I won't agree with you then and I won't have any sympathy either.
I honestly wish people would realize this fact. Bill Clinton WAS Impeached- he was just not convicted of the accusations in the Articles of Impeachment.
Heh. You'd be surprised. While it doesn't directly do that, it DOES set that most of the rules for content are unconstitutional.
Courts have been slow to appreciate the expressive power of trademarks. Words, even a single word can be powerful. Mr. Simon Shiao Tam named his band THE SLANTS to make a statement about racial and cultural issues in this country. With his band name, Mr. Tam conveys more about our society than many volumes of undisputedly protected speech. Another rejected mark, STOP THE ISLAMISATION OF AMERICA, proclaims that Islamisation is undesirable and shouldbe stopped. Many of the marks rejected as disparaging convey hurtful speech that harms members of oft stigmatized communties. But the First Amendment protects even hurtful speech.
The government cannot refuse to register disparaging marks because it disapproves of the expressive messages conveyed by the marks. It cannot refuse to register marks because it concludes that such marks will be disparaging to others. The government regulation at issue amounts to viewpoint discrimination, and under the strict scrutiny review appropriate for government regulation of message or viewpoint, we conclude that the disparagement proscription of 2(a) is unconstitutional.
Because the government has offered no legitimate interests justifying 2(a), we conclude that it would also be unconstitutional under the intermediate scrutiny traditionally applied to regulation of the commercial aspects of speech.
The reasoning is immediately applicable to the content rules.
GE has. It's called Wink and it's got the most stunning range of interoperability on the market. ZB HA, ZB LL, Z-Wave, Lutron's protocol. Insteon's working on theirs.
1) There is no provision in any of the light bulbs out there (regardless of make and protocol, this includes Cree, Phillips, Osram, Lifx, etc.) to update firmware. Old modes of operation are just that. A change in firmware would be required to fully lock out non-Hue bulbs as they conform to the ZigBee Light-Link application profile in full. A change to lock out all Light-Link bulbs except those "certified" by Phillips would require a firmware change on the bulbs themselves.
2) There are two application profiles that directly involve lighting provided by the ZigBee consortium. One is Home Automation, the other Light-Link.
3) Home Automation has security modes available but are typically not used, using the fallback security key because there was no automatic handling of security. Light-Link, on the other hand, has such simple authentication control so that you can screw in a new light bulb and expect the new IoT cluster to be "secure" (I consider this debatable, but that's not part of this discussion...)
4) Many of the ZigBee devices out there meet conformance, but they're HA profile only. Either because they're earlier on devices or because the vendor was being cheap. It costs additional money to implement a Light-Link device. Each SKU involved has their own private key, issued to the vendor from the ZigBee consortium. A LL key requires the following: Membership in the Consortium ($3500), conformance testing for the device (varies, usually something on the order of $5-10k), and a $1000 license fee paid to the consortium that is paid out before they hand you the magic token to have it "just simply work". With HA, you don't need anything other than knowing the ZCL protocols for HA profile and implementing them precisely.
5) Conformance to LL, requires that a controller and any repeaters support an HA device in failback mode and all end nodes must be able to work with a compliant HA controller node (gateway). Likely to have happened is that they took the HA fallback mode out of the gateway and it's corresponding controller or they block anything with a non-supported manufacturer ID. That'd be the only way they could "enforce" this under the facts that they're a ZigBee system. If they're blocking by manufacturer ID, I wish them the best of luck there- down that path is a path of pain. They *WILL* be broken upon the wheel there. If they've changed it so that only LL mode is supported, that has other, equally dire consequences.
6) In any event, you can use *any* ZigBee capable bulbs, GE, Osram, Phillips, Cree, etc. with a Wink bridge which is currently unlikely to change since it's not in GE's interests to play this game for what they're trying to do. Osram has some color and color temperature changing bulbs in their Lightify lineup. I'm suspecting GE's got similar plans. Moreover, if you have one of the IoT gateway devices similar to GE's that try to handle Z-Wave, ZigBee, and a few others, they'll drive the Hue and other bulbs correctly.
DRM? Hardly. Just an uppity vendor thinking they have a handle on things when they don't in the slightest. If you can't find any other color shifting bulbs, just buy the bulbs, their "gateway" is a middleman that's in the way if you've got anyone else's more capable gateway. You don't need their bullshit. You don't need most of the other player's rubbish. Just get an Wink (Maybe IRIS...I haven't evaluated their stuff...) gateway if you can't find or justify the expense of some of the others. The lights will just simply work and you can do more than just lights. You don't need/want the other vendor's supplied gateway which only does lighting control without adding nifty things like touch panel controls that make the lighting work mostly like the traditional way, with a bit more fine-grained control over it all.
Heh... Almost any NSAID is performance enhancing. I've never heard of dosing with Ibuprofen, but they use Phenylbutazone ("bute") all the time with horses so long as they're not in the ring and about a month BEFORE they hit a race or ring. Bute used to be available for human use- but it's really very nasty and was banned for all but ankylosing spondylitis when the other treatments won't do- because it's effective for it...just dangerous.
Knowing that it's effective (as is Naproxen) for this sort of thing, I'm unsurprised. Naproxen's not made for equine use, but vets will prescribe it all the same for compounded and other use for things that won't respond to bute. Any of the NSAIDs will be "performance enhancing" for a racehorse because they'll suppress the lactic acid inflammation response in their muscles so they can run longer and harder.
Slashdot Mirror
Not to hear them whinge about it. Each used sale takes money away from them in their own whines and words. Because if they could keep you from buying the used copy, they could sell you the new one (If I'm disinterested in spending the money, no, you wouldn't- but they don't see things that way...)...
Here's an example of the thinking there...and a study that shows how dangerous the thinking actually might be...
Bingo! Not sharing that you found nothing means you're trying to hide things...
It is a requirement, though not often followed in any endeavor these days, to show your "homework" for a given conclusion or set thereof.
Doesn't matter if you're talking a Law, or a bit of Physics research.
Hiding things or discounting them because they don't provide you conclusive answers is not science, law, or the like- it's merely religion in other clothing.
Ah, this is so cute.
Copyright is an artificial, government backed monopoly on the publication and distribution of a "protected" work .
You are not assured of any money whatsoever. Ever. The LGP edition of Ballistics from Grin, SE proved that out to me. Even if there wasn't the 5-10k units of pirated versions on The Pirate Bay out there, the thing probably wouldn't have been much more sold for Linux.
Not because of the Linux market's "small". I know better. You appear to not.
Not because of the piracy, though that didn't help. I know better. You appear to not.
It was because we couldn't price the thing to what the market, at that time, could willingly bear. People would point to the bargain-bin priced Windows version and ask why they should spend $40 when it's available for $5, with the understanding that it only ran so-so under WINE. Seriously.
People will pay you what they believe it is worth. I know this because I saw some small, but real amounts of money from my participation with the Humble Indie Bundle #2. No DRM. No BS. Pay me what you thought this was worth or donate it all to charity- or somewhere in-between. It's my right and desire to control how it's shipped, copied, etc. within the limits allowed me by law for things, relative to work for hire, etc. that I agree to. But, to say what you said? X-D
Do you have IP, which is to say, creative works protected by Copyright or Patent? I. Do. As a rights holder, I can tell you that the rights are only worth the amount you are legally able to pursue enforcement of the same. Unless you're a big, big corporation, there's some hard limits on your rights there- because you don't have the finances and all to defend the same. Legally speaking, your only position (hint: Morality doesn't even factor into this...) is to not use the works in question. Morally? You should abide by the law so long as it's not wrong/evil. DMCA? Probably wrong/evil. Copyright? You have fair use exemptions, which in many cases people "stealing" it all fall under. And, it's not theft. It's infringing on your right to control publication and distribution. Again...no assurances of money. No assurances of people doing the legally right thing...ever.
Morality? This varies between persons and what faiths and beliefs they hold. I don't hold yours...why should I let you dictate to me that? (Oh, WAIT... I don't ,)
Heh... Since many know they did this...I question the "quality" of anything that they provide. I don't even bother contemplating paying for their shit. I see if I can find comparable or the actual article published by the school, etc. that did the work. Oftentimes, there's as good or better than at Elsevier.
Notgear.
Which makes them quite the Tool.
This doesn't even get into the reality that 70% of all the "computers" are embedded beasties...all those "IoT" processors and the bulk of them are programmed in C or C++. A Node.JS or Python option is available, but neither of those are what you'd call "secure". You might be able to get Go to "go" onto those platforms or Swift- but they're a bit largish and don't really target the small stuff.
The remark about .Net or Java means they're a real Headupassian. No clue whatsoever what they're managing- and it sadly shows.
Ah, but must will stupidly agree to it.
I'm unsure I even like this "feature" with it being controllable.
Explain Union Shops. If you aren't a member of the union and pay your dues, you don't get to work there.
Bingo. People keep presuming things that they shouldn't. LiFi's a consume only thing in the large. It's not as useful as people believe it to be. As I said earlier on this discussion for TFA- this is a solution looking for problems to solve.
Hint: It's largely one-way. It doesn't bring office space magic unless it's two way- and while there's two-way LiFi, it's got it's own set of issues.
They already have this. It's called HomePlug. For most situations in most homes you can get gigabit links over your house wiring.
Heh. They're using DC strip lights with an AC->DC power supply and possibly a bit of intelligence on top of the constant current switcher.
Thing is, if you're doing the converter at the room level, you're still using 110 mains, etc. This doesn't gain you anything. LiFi is intriguing (in that it took them this long to "get" there) but it's limited in what it can/can't do... It's a solution looking for problems to solve.
I doubt there IS one...
Ludicrous Speed....GO!!!
People keep fallaciously saying this... If it makes you feel better, by all means keep repeating it to yourself. You don't
1) Understand HOW a President gets elected (Seriously- if you mention "popular vote" in this context, you DO NOT KNOW.)
2) Understand that it's not what YOU wish, but what a lot of other people think that you clearly know nothing about.
While I didn't agree with the man's take on things, I thought Romney was going to take it because of anti-Dem fervor back then. Clearly I was wrong. Pontificating like you have here, you're likely to be that too. Just don't act shocked, pissed, etc. when it doesn't work out that way. I won't agree with you then and I won't have any sympathy either.
I honestly wish people would realize this fact. Bill Clinton WAS Impeached- he was just not convicted of the accusations in the Articles of Impeachment.
"Sliding Window"
"Windowing Filter"
"X11 Windowing System"
There *is* a reason they didn't let them Trademark "Windows" but could do "Microsoft Windows".
Heh. You'd be surprised. While it doesn't directly do that, it DOES set that most of the rules for content are unconstitutional.
The reasoning is immediately applicable to the content rules.
It also killed mold. That's part of why it ended up in household paints.
Nobody's done this? Heh...
GE has. It's called Wink and it's got the most stunning range of interoperability on the market. ZB HA, ZB LL, Z-Wave, Lutron's protocol.
Insteon's working on theirs.
1) There is no provision in any of the light bulbs out there (regardless of make and protocol, this includes Cree, Phillips, Osram, Lifx, etc.) to update firmware. Old modes of operation are just that. A change in firmware would be required to fully lock out non-Hue bulbs as they conform to the ZigBee Light-Link application profile in full. A change to lock out all Light-Link bulbs except those "certified" by Phillips would require a firmware change on the bulbs themselves.
2) There are two application profiles that directly involve lighting provided by the ZigBee consortium. One is Home Automation, the other Light-Link.
3) Home Automation has security modes available but are typically not used, using the fallback security key because there was no automatic handling of security. Light-Link, on the other hand, has such simple authentication control so that you can screw in a new light bulb and expect the new IoT cluster to be "secure" (I consider this debatable, but that's not part of this discussion...)
4) Many of the ZigBee devices out there meet conformance, but they're HA profile only. Either because they're earlier on devices or because the vendor was being cheap. It costs additional money to implement a Light-Link device. Each SKU involved has their own private key, issued to the vendor from the ZigBee consortium. A LL key requires the following: Membership in the Consortium ($3500), conformance testing for the device (varies, usually something on the order of $5-10k), and a $1000 license fee paid to the consortium that is paid out before they hand you the magic token to have it "just simply work". With HA, you don't need anything other than knowing the ZCL protocols for HA profile and implementing them precisely.
5) Conformance to LL, requires that a controller and any repeaters support an HA device in failback mode and all end nodes must be able to work with a compliant HA controller node (gateway). Likely to have happened is that they took the HA fallback mode out of the gateway and it's corresponding controller or they block anything with a non-supported manufacturer ID. That'd be the only way they could "enforce" this under the facts that they're a ZigBee system. If they're blocking by manufacturer ID, I wish them the best of luck there- down that path is a path of pain. They *WILL* be broken upon the wheel there. If they've changed it so that only LL mode is supported, that has other, equally dire consequences.
6) In any event, you can use *any* ZigBee capable bulbs, GE, Osram, Phillips, Cree, etc. with a Wink bridge which is currently unlikely to change since it's not in GE's interests to play this game for what they're trying to do. Osram has some color and color temperature changing bulbs in their Lightify lineup. I'm suspecting GE's got similar plans. Moreover, if you have one of the IoT gateway devices similar to GE's that try to handle Z-Wave, ZigBee, and a few others, they'll drive the Hue and other bulbs correctly.
DRM? Hardly. Just an uppity vendor thinking they have a handle on things when they don't in the slightest. If you can't find any other color shifting bulbs, just buy the bulbs, their "gateway" is a middleman that's in the way if you've got anyone else's more capable gateway. You don't need their bullshit. You don't need most of the other player's rubbish. Just get an Wink (Maybe IRIS...I haven't evaluated their stuff...) gateway if you can't find or justify the expense of some of the others. The lights will just simply work and you can do more than just lights. You don't need/want the other vendor's supplied gateway which only does lighting control without adding nifty things like touch panel controls that make the lighting work mostly like the traditional way, with a bit more fine-grained control over it all.
Heh... Almost any NSAID is performance enhancing. I've never heard of dosing with Ibuprofen, but they use Phenylbutazone ("bute") all the time with horses so long as they're not in the ring and about a month BEFORE they hit a race or ring. Bute used to be available for human use- but it's really very nasty and was banned for all but ankylosing spondylitis when the other treatments won't do- because it's effective for it...just dangerous. Knowing that it's effective (as is Naproxen) for this sort of thing, I'm unsurprised. Naproxen's not made for equine use, but vets will prescribe it all the same for compounded and other use for things that won't respond to bute. Any of the NSAIDs will be "performance enhancing" for a racehorse because they'll suppress the lactic acid inflammation response in their muscles so they can run longer and harder.
He was against a strong field. One of them had opted to skip Preakness just so they'd be ahead of everyone else.
One minor difference...horses can refuse to do something. See it all the time. If you have no concept about it, be silent. Seriously.