To elaborate on the other posters, the term curtilage refers to a very small area around your house (like a typical suburban yard), and doesn't include other private property like farmland, etc. These people had a large wooded plot of land with a house on it. They had large fences and no trespassing signs all around the property. The police set up cameras on the private property, but away from the house.
Here is a better article that also links to the full ruling, and has some very informative posts in the discussion.
Also, RedHat doesn't care about mobile devices; they care about ARM servers. 64bit will be more more relevant in that area, as java backend code often needs as much memory as you can give it.
From what I understand, there hasn't been a single piece of graphics hardware ever that implemented every single OpenGL call in hardware. The point of Mesa was to provide reference code that driver implementers could build on, replacing calls that their hardware did support with the appropriate driver hooks, and leaving the rest as is, while providing a consistent ABI (at least per-distro) to applications that need to link against libGL. It serves the same purpose today as when it was first written.
That is pretty much what they did say. Their conclusion was that the recent small earthquakes did not make it more likely that a larger earthquake was about to happen, however, this is an earthquake prone area, one could happen an any time. Furthermore, they stated that there were a lot of old unsafe buildings in the area that should be evacuated in the case of any earthquake as they do not provide any protection, and replaced as soon as practical.
The government asked for their assessment, and they gave the best prediction they could given the data they had. Nearly every other seismologist in the world would have given the same assessment. They are being sentenced to prison because they did not predict the quake, pure and simple. The lesson here is that if the Italian government ever asks your assessment on anything, the only valid response is "fuck off and die".
The submitter, pigrabbitbear, is the author/editor/whatever of the story. Everything he has ever submitted has been from motherboard.vice.com, and he even openly uses it has his contact link.
Yes there is. In most states all parties that get at least 5% of the vote in most states get the consolation prize of being recognized as major parties, and don't have to jump through ridiculous hoops to get their local candidates on ballot for the next 4 years.
In most states, if your party has 5% or so of the vote is the presidential election, then your party is recognized as an official party, and any local candidates you run for the next 4 years are guaranteed a spot on the ballot, and sometimes even in the debate. If you don't, then you have to collect signatures from X% of the population for every single local candidate you want to run. And deal with election officials that go out of their way to declare as many those signatures invalid as they possibly can to keep you off the ballot. Even if you get the signatures, you won't be included in local debates. The third parties have to invest all their resources just to get on the local ballot, and have nothing left for actual campaigning.
Furthermore, there is a large portion of the population that ignores elections except the presidential election. This is a great time to let the public know who your party is, what it stands for, and help shape the debate and issues that people are talking about.
Not much economies of scale at those quantities.
on
Beware the Rings of Pluto
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
You don't really get much improvement in per-unit cost by building 10 of something vs 2. The biggest factor in the cost even with just the first couple isn't the engineering but the testing and qualification. Most of that has to be repeated for every unit you build until you are creating enough to have confidence in the past performance and to fall back to statistical testing, or at least are building enough for automating that work to be economical. But you would need to be creating several dozen of them for that to kick in. Furthermore, construction is more expensive that you are allowing for at those low quantities since it's all is done by hand, by highly skilled labor. That won't drop by much until you get into mass-manufacturing quantities, hundreds at least.
So you would get minor savings, and at the loss of a huge amount of science. There is a reason that each of these probes is wildly different, and that is because the have wildly varying requirements. There is no one-size fits all suite of sensors. They will want different spectral ranges, different optics setups (detailed, narrow FOV vs wide coverage), different transmitter requirements (Horizon has much farther to transmit than MRO), all of which drives different battery requirements.
Finally, the point of science is to keep learning; to keep pushing things forward. You do that by sending probes with improved and/or different capabilities, not just more of the same. Sure we could have sent 3 more MERs (Spirit/Opportunity) for the cost of Curiosity, but we wouldn't have learned as much as Curiosity will be able to tell us.
No, the court ruled correctly. The law has a very specific definition of stored communications, and as such only applies to backups and transient copies, not long-term hosted data. It's a stupid definition, but that's congress's fault not the judge's.
None of the things you mentioned are criteria for determining whether something is fair use. They are examples given in the law, and were never intended to be an exhaustive enumeration of instances of fair use:
... the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright.
The real criteria for fair use follows that introductory paragraph:
In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include— (1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes; (2) the nature of the copyrighted work; (3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and (4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.
No, that isn't the implication. Whether they are in violation of copyright or not depends on whether their drivers are a derivative work of Linux, and if so whether fair use would allow them anyway. Both of these things are decided by courts not by the copyright holder. The significance of his notification is in determining whether the infringement is willful or not, and thus eligible for stronger penalties.
I'm actually confused by the claim that FM/AM radio pay nothing to performers, since I'm pretty sure that they did pay.
To expound on Zak's comment, there are two types of copyright on music; one for the composition/lyrics/etc, and one for the specific recording. Terrestrial radio has to pay royalties for the former but not the later, while internet streaming sites (and satellite radio) have to pay both.
On the other hand the class of license that a terrestrial broadcaster has puts an upper limit on the number of listeners they can have, while there is no such fundamental limit on internet radio. Furthermore, your revenues should also scale linearly with the number of listeners if you have a sane business model. So it makes sense that internet streaming royalties scale linearly, the problem is that the rate is much too high. And it wouldn't have to be if terrestrial radio lost it's Edison-era exception, and had to pay full royalties as well.
The main point of the camera is to have firm information to give to the cops. They aren't going to waste resources doing an in-depth investigation over something like this. But if you can give them a license plate number and a picture of the guys, they are much more likely to deal with them. And if not you have everything you need to head to small claims court.
Re:Was hoping a faster algorithm would be chosen..
on
SHA-3 Winner Announced
·
· Score: 2
That is a strange criteria though, as 99.9% of the people using SHA3 and depending on it's security will use a software implementation. Practically the only people who deal with hardware implementations anymore are those trying to break a cryptosystem. Of course all the speed measures for the SHA-3 contenders (hw and sw implementation) are relatively small constant multiples/divisors of SHA2, so it really isn't a big deal from a security or convenience factor.
Those of us in Maricopa County can worry about our sheriff; the rest of the country can worry about theirs. It's a local elected office. I do not understand the national media attention.
American citizens don't deserve to loose the fundamental constitutionally guaranteed rights when they travel through another county. Nor do prisoners deserve to be loose their (more limited) rights because they are transferred into your county. It's essential that his abuses get national media attention, so the rest of us can know to stay out of Maricopa county until you guys (or the feds) finally get around to doing something about it.
Yes, and if people were perfect we wouldn't need any government at all. Heaven forbid we actually punish corporations for abusing their power in ways that are harmful to society. What a horrible law.
I played around with several, so I may have some details wrong but IIRC it was: RedHat 4 -> Slackware -> Debian Woody -> RedHat 7 -> Mandrake -> Ubuntu -> Debian Squeeze
Of these, the two Debian install were the ones that stayed on my computer the longest, and I've pretty much settled on it now. It is rock solid, doesn't randomly break stuff with updates and has a great package manager and repository.
The RPM hell related to the early libc changes put me off of RedHat for a long time. I decided that if I was going to futz with that sort of stuff I might as well use a simpler distro that exposed you to it, hence Slackware, which was a nice learning experience. I'd really like to do a Linux From Scratch install one of these days to update my understanding of modern Linux ecosystem internals.
I wasn't thrilled with Mandrake. I chose it because it was supposed to have nice hardware setup wizards, but when I ran them they silently failed, leaving me with no clue of what happened, and leaving the system config files in an inconsistent half configured state. I had to read through the scripts line by line to figure out what they had done and undo the damage (or wipe and reinstall).
Then I got tired of building my own machines and decided to support Dell's step into the Desktop Linux world. Hence Ubuntu. Out of the box it worked great. But every single upgrade after that broke something. Usually the Intel graphics, sometimes the audio. I eventually got fed up with it and went back to Debian.
I've read their response and it is bullshit. There is a difference between trusting someone to write software for you, and trusting them to receive your private information over the internet. For example, hospitals may trust software to process patient data. They don't (and can't by law) trust that software to send patient info to some random cloud service. Home users deserve the same respect as corporate users and should be informed of any services that transmit their information so they can decide whether to use the service or not. This is basic stuff, and the fact that Canonical still doesn't get why anyone might be concerned is very troubling and a good hint to stay clear of them in the future.
Every time you search for a local file on your computer, the details of that search will be transmitted to a third party cloud service. That is a huge potential privacy issue regardless of who that service is. Worse, they they don't even make their users aware of this fact, which is completely unacceptable. That Canonical still doesn't understand this after being having it brought to their attention means they clearly cannot be trusted to assemble a secure Linux distribution.
But the interesting part is that half of them would rather defend their accidental choice and argue against what they really believed than admit that they made a simple mistake filling out a form. It is an interesting insight into how ego can be more influential than opinion, and how that can be used against people to influence their opinions.
Sorry, I just now realized that I misread your post. In the example you gave, the square wave and triangle wave will contain many harmonics of the main period, many of which beyond the range of human hearing. If those three signals are low-pass filtered at 22kHz before sampling, the sampled signal will be able to completely reproduce the shape of those filtered signals. That is, it will faithfully reproduce all components of the signals that are within the range of human hearing.
Also in the last line of my post replace "dynamic range" with "frequency range".
Slashdot Mirror
No they are not. Churches have lost their tax-free status because of this in the past, but usually only if someone forces the issue.
To elaborate on the other posters, the term curtilage refers to a very small area around your house (like a typical suburban yard), and doesn't include other private property like farmland, etc. These people had a large wooded plot of land with a house on it. They had large fences and no trespassing signs all around the property. The police set up cameras on the private property, but away from the house.
Here is a better article that also links to the full ruling, and has some very informative posts in the discussion.
Also, RedHat doesn't care about mobile devices; they care about ARM servers. 64bit will be more more relevant in that area, as java backend code often needs as much memory as you can give it.
From what I understand, there hasn't been a single piece of graphics hardware ever that implemented every single OpenGL call in hardware. The point of Mesa was to provide reference code that driver implementers could build on, replacing calls that their hardware did support with the appropriate driver hooks, and leaving the rest as is, while providing a consistent ABI (at least per-distro) to applications that need to link against libGL. It serves the same purpose today as when it was first written.
That is pretty much what they did say. Their conclusion was that the recent small earthquakes did not make it more likely that a larger earthquake was about to happen, however, this is an earthquake prone area, one could happen an any time. Furthermore, they stated that there were a lot of old unsafe buildings in the area that should be evacuated in the case of any earthquake as they do not provide any protection, and replaced as soon as practical.
The government asked for their assessment, and they gave the best prediction they could given the data they had. Nearly every other seismologist in the world would have given the same assessment. They are being sentenced to prison because they did not predict the quake, pure and simple. The lesson here is that if the Italian government ever asks your assessment on anything, the only valid response is "fuck off and die".
The submitter, pigrabbitbear, is the author/editor/whatever of the story. Everything he has ever submitted has been from motherboard.vice.com, and he even openly uses it has his contact link.
Yes there is. In most states all parties that get at least 5% of the vote in most states get the consolation prize of being recognized as major parties, and don't have to jump through ridiculous hoops to get their local candidates on ballot for the next 4 years.
In most states, if your party has 5% or so of the vote is the presidential election, then your party is recognized as an official party, and any local candidates you run for the next 4 years are guaranteed a spot on the ballot, and sometimes even in the debate. If you don't, then you have to collect signatures from X% of the population for every single local candidate you want to run. And deal with election officials that go out of their way to declare as many those signatures invalid as they possibly can to keep you off the ballot. Even if you get the signatures, you won't be included in local debates. The third parties have to invest all their resources just to get on the local ballot, and have nothing left for actual campaigning.
Furthermore, there is a large portion of the population that ignores elections except the presidential election. This is a great time to let the public know who your party is, what it stands for, and help shape the debate and issues that people are talking about.
You don't really get much improvement in per-unit cost by building 10 of something vs 2. The biggest factor in the cost even with just the first couple isn't the engineering but the testing and qualification. Most of that has to be repeated for every unit you build until you are creating enough to have confidence in the past performance and to fall back to statistical testing, or at least are building enough for automating that work to be economical. But you would need to be creating several dozen of them for that to kick in. Furthermore, construction is more expensive that you are allowing for at those low quantities since it's all is done by hand, by highly skilled labor. That won't drop by much until you get into mass-manufacturing quantities, hundreds at least.
So you would get minor savings, and at the loss of a huge amount of science. There is a reason that each of these probes is wildly different, and that is because the have wildly varying requirements. There is no one-size fits all suite of sensors. They will want different spectral ranges, different optics setups (detailed, narrow FOV vs wide coverage), different transmitter requirements (Horizon has much farther to transmit than MRO), all of which drives different battery requirements.
Finally, the point of science is to keep learning; to keep pushing things forward. You do that by sending probes with improved and/or different capabilities, not just more of the same. Sure we could have sent 3 more MERs (Spirit/Opportunity) for the cost of Curiosity, but we wouldn't have learned as much as Curiosity will be able to tell us.
No, the court ruled correctly. The law has a very specific definition of stored communications, and as such only applies to backups and transient copies, not long-term hosted data. It's a stupid definition, but that's congress's fault not the judge's.
None of the things you mentioned are criteria for determining whether something is fair use. They are examples given in the law, and were never intended to be an exhaustive enumeration of instances of fair use:
... the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright.
The real criteria for fair use follows that introductory paragraph:
In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include—
(1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
(2) the nature of the copyrighted work;
(3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
(4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.
This video easily passes those criteria.
No, that isn't the implication. Whether they are in violation of copyright or not depends on whether their drivers are a derivative work of Linux, and if so whether fair use would allow them anyway. Both of these things are decided by courts not by the copyright holder. The significance of his notification is in determining whether the infringement is willful or not, and thus eligible for stronger penalties.
I'm actually confused by the claim that FM/AM radio pay nothing to performers, since I'm pretty sure that they did pay.
To expound on Zak's comment, there are two types of copyright on music; one for the composition/lyrics/etc, and one for the specific recording. Terrestrial radio has to pay royalties for the former but not the later, while internet streaming sites (and satellite radio) have to pay both.
On the other hand the class of license that a terrestrial broadcaster has puts an upper limit on the number of listeners they can have, while there is no such fundamental limit on internet radio. Furthermore, your revenues should also scale linearly with the number of listeners if you have a sane business model. So it makes sense that internet streaming royalties scale linearly, the problem is that the rate is much too high. And it wouldn't have to be if terrestrial radio lost it's Edison-era exception, and had to pay full royalties as well.
The main point of the camera is to have firm information to give to the cops. They aren't going to waste resources doing an in-depth investigation over something like this. But if you can give them a license plate number and a picture of the guys, they are much more likely to deal with them. And if not you have everything you need to head to small claims court.
That is a strange criteria though, as 99.9% of the people using SHA3 and depending on it's security will use a software implementation. Practically the only people who deal with hardware implementations anymore are those trying to break a cryptosystem. Of course all the speed measures for the SHA-3 contenders (hw and sw implementation) are relatively small constant multiples/divisors of SHA2, so it really isn't a big deal from a security or convenience factor.
Looking forward to reading the final report.
Those of us in Maricopa County can worry about our sheriff; the rest of the country can worry about theirs. It's a local elected office. I do not understand the national media attention.
American citizens don't deserve to loose the fundamental constitutionally guaranteed rights when they travel through another county. Nor do prisoners deserve to be loose their (more limited) rights because they are transferred into your county. It's essential that his abuses get national media attention, so the rest of us can know to stay out of Maricopa county until you guys (or the feds) finally get around to doing something about it.
Yes, and if people were perfect we wouldn't need any government at all. Heaven forbid we actually punish corporations for abusing their power in ways that are harmful to society. What a horrible law.
I played around with several, so I may have some details wrong but IIRC it was:
RedHat 4 -> Slackware -> Debian Woody -> RedHat 7 -> Mandrake -> Ubuntu -> Debian Squeeze
Of these, the two Debian install were the ones that stayed on my computer the longest, and I've pretty much settled on it now. It is rock solid, doesn't randomly break stuff with updates and has a great package manager and repository.
The RPM hell related to the early libc changes put me off of RedHat for a long time. I decided that if I was going to futz with that sort of stuff I might as well use a simpler distro that exposed you to it, hence Slackware, which was a nice learning experience. I'd really like to do a Linux From Scratch install one of these days to update my understanding of modern Linux ecosystem internals.
I wasn't thrilled with Mandrake. I chose it because it was supposed to have nice hardware setup wizards, but when I ran them they silently failed, leaving me with no clue of what happened, and leaving the system config files in an inconsistent half configured state. I had to read through the scripts line by line to figure out what they had done and undo the damage (or wipe and reinstall).
Then I got tired of building my own machines and decided to support Dell's step into the Desktop Linux world. Hence Ubuntu. Out of the box it worked great. But every single upgrade after that broke something. Usually the Intel graphics, sometimes the audio. I eventually got fed up with it and went back to Debian.
Nearly all of the Win8 tablets that will be available at launch are running Intel chips, including those from Lenovo, Dell and HP.
I've read their response and it is bullshit. There is a difference between trusting someone to write software for you, and trusting them to receive your private information over the internet. For example, hospitals may trust software to process patient data. They don't (and can't by law) trust that software to send patient info to some random cloud service. Home users deserve the same respect as corporate users and should be informed of any services that transmit their information so they can decide whether to use the service or not. This is basic stuff, and the fact that Canonical still doesn't get why anyone might be concerned is very troubling and a good hint to stay clear of them in the future.
Every time you search for a local file on your computer, the details of that search will be transmitted to a third party cloud service. That is a huge potential privacy issue regardless of who that service is. Worse, they they don't even make their users aware of this fact, which is completely unacceptable. That Canonical still doesn't understand this after being having it brought to their attention means they clearly cannot be trusted to assemble a secure Linux distribution.
But the interesting part is that half of them would rather defend their accidental choice and argue against what they really believed than admit that they made a simple mistake filling out a form. It is an interesting insight into how ego can be more influential than opinion, and how that can be used against people to influence their opinions.
Sorry, I just now realized that I misread your post. In the example you gave, the square wave and triangle wave will contain many harmonics of the main period, many of which beyond the range of human hearing. If those three signals are low-pass filtered at 22kHz before sampling, the sampled signal will be able to completely reproduce the shape of those filtered signals. That is, it will faithfully reproduce all components of the signals that are within the range of human hearing.
Also in the last line of my post replace "dynamic range" with "frequency range".