I think you're overstating that. They're talking about a logistics system for simplifying tracking of material, similar to slapping a bar-code sticker on it, that works when you have a whole truckful of stuff to check-in to a location and don't want to unload it first. That doesn't need any more security than the bar-code or even a printed box label would.
For secure applications they will have defined a secured system and if it is RFID then it will be a secured system using RFID as a transport for the properly encrypted data, with a means to defeat risks created by the obvious openness of that transmission. They're the DoD. They do that stuff for a living to keep from dying.
Your credit-card company, however, is just stupid enough to put sensitive data on a chip on a credit card with dumb encryption and allow it to be stolen, replicated, and used by anyone with a walkie-talkie and a speak-n-spell, then call it a "security device". Then jack up your annual fee and reduce your minimum monthly payment to make you pay for it. They do that stuff for a living because you think credit is cash.
Yes it's fun watching them do the stupid stuff, but they could limit that to the part where they replicate the statement of the myth. Even when they're doing the version they think should work they make basic science mistakes. The part where they then take it over the top and force things to blow up? That's where the money is made.
And they could bring the boffins in after the failure to explain the real science, so as not to give away the ending (which most people can see coming a mile away anyhow, owing to the fact that they passed a science class at some point).
And a lot of the experiments are borderline enough while not being totally self-defeating that the result may be surprising but true.
However, they make positive and negative conclusions using blatantly faulty experiments (false controls, breaches of protocol, etc.) and then get reamed for it on their website and have to eat crow, when pretty much anyone who'd done even a cursory review could have told them they were making a mess of it. It's clear they sometimes do not care if they're proving anything or not, whether the deviation from their original intent has anything to do with "good TV" or not.
They mail it in sometimes. Which I have no doubt has caused more than one person to stop watching consistently, mini-gun madness or no.
They won't can Adam. Where would they find someone who's simultaneously so devious and so ignorant of scientific fact?
They tried to un-stupid the show a little when they brought in Grant, who actually seems to have passed a science class at some time in his past, but even he seems to have lost the ability to keep them from walking straight into unphysical presumptions.
All that production budget and they can't spend a few minutes a week phoning a real scientist to ask if their ideas to prove/disprove the myths aren't just more myths? They only seem to spend on "explosives experts", but that's their insurance company talking. I guess the insurance company cares if someone gets blown up, but not if someone gets stupider thinking it's being made smarter.
Google is making things up as it goes along and hoping you'll believe only the last thing they tell you.
They're keeping the data. And using it. And profiting from it. As long as you don't stop them. And how can you? Except by not giving it to them, by never using the Internet.
Government officials making false statements are performing illegal acts. Saying you can not copy the laws is false. The state is saying you can not copy the laws. And so on.
If you can quadruple productivity of well-paid individuals by giving them junk jewelry and alpha-wave stimulation, then you really shouldn't have had to pay them well in the first place.
Only if you're the sort of feeb who goes to restaurants where they make that sort of display for their patrons on their birthday.
If you really want that song to be "in the public domain", you're going to have to pay its owners for the rights and then donate it to the public yourself.
Did your parents pay a royalty to sing that song to you?
No?
Then what is unjust about it?
The authors do not harass the public. They only ensure that big corporations do not coopt their intellectual property for their own profit without paying a fair share. If the corporations are so penurious that they will sing an annoyingly unsatisfying birthday song to you instead, then your problem is with the corporation, not with the copyright on the song you want to have sung to yourself and 193 strangers in a public place by paid employees of the corporation.
As for Steamboat Willie, that's a matter of ending the misconception being written into our laws that corporations are beings with the rights of people.
No, it's still true. AMD combined their x86 with NexGen's and kept their reliance on Intel.
Plus, AMD and Intel have a continuing technology-sharing agreement. It also keeps AMD from being able to sell its CPU business or even to stop making CPUs, either of which would end AMD's or the buyer's right to use Intel IP but would grant Intel full, irrevocable rights to use the AMD IP it now uses.
AMD might be able to sell the NexGen IP, but by now that's a few % of the value in any x86-compatible CPU.
AMD is pretty much tanked anyway. It's selling off bits and pieces to keep the lights on (its loans are called if its cash drops below some huge number, so even though they have over a billion dollars in the bank they are acting like they're nearly broke). But by the time it's done it will have to realize it can't ever be profitable at the CPU business. It's too far behind in both circuit and technology to compete at a profit in mainstream or high-end, and Intel isn't leaving it the low-end markets any more. AMD doesn't even have a chip to play in Atom's space. They're done for.
I think that this is more or less the point. California has lost sight of 'risk management' in favor of 'risk avoidance'.
Democratic governments are not rational. They are based on the faulty assumption that plural politics is reasoning thought. It is likewise irrational for the electorate to allow them to believe that, but we do (and by "we" I mean "all of you who haven't clued up yet and if I wasn't in the minority this would be fixed by now").
However, as Mr. Churchill will explain to you, despite this flaw in the democratic forms of government, the rest that now exist are worse.
Consumers are not at risk unless they start chewing on the LEDs and actually manage to get into them. And then maybe not until they inhale the chip inside.
The risk would be to those who work in plants producing Gallium Arsenide itself. Anywhere it's heated enough to cause gaseous emission. They should be careful.
nVidia doesn't make anything. They contract out to TSMC, Chartered, etc.
If nVidia has a black-box version of the x86, licensing is irrelevant and Intel can do nothing about it. Montalvo Systems is doing a black-box x86, and doing it well enough that Sun bailed them out when they were running out of money in April.
AMD's problem is AMD got its x86 know-how from Intel's own documentation, so AMD is Intel's bitch forever, or until AMD runs itself into the ground, which at this point is rapidly approaching.
Very few people know how not to use all the things that obfuscate a perl program.
Even good perl programmers have trouble understanding perl code written by other good perl programmers who use different idiomatic constructs.
And not many people are learning Perl as deeply as they did when it was newer, which makes it even worse as a maintenance problem, and a drag on developing your entry-level maintainers into good programmers.
Slashdot Mirror
I think you're overstating that. They're talking about a logistics system for simplifying tracking of material, similar to slapping a bar-code sticker on it, that works when you have a whole truckful of stuff to check-in to a location and don't want to unload it first. That doesn't need any more security than the bar-code or even a printed box label would.
For secure applications they will have defined a secured system and if it is RFID then it will be a secured system using RFID as a transport for the properly encrypted data, with a means to defeat risks created by the obvious openness of that transmission. They're the DoD. They do that stuff for a living to keep from dying.
Your credit-card company, however, is just stupid enough to put sensitive data on a chip on a credit card with dumb encryption and allow it to be stolen, replicated, and used by anyone with a walkie-talkie and a speak-n-spell, then call it a "security device". Then jack up your annual fee and reduce your minimum monthly payment to make you pay for it. They do that stuff for a living because you think credit is cash.
Yeah that Mr. Wizard never lasted.
Yes it's fun watching them do the stupid stuff, but they could limit that to the part where they replicate the statement of the myth. Even when they're doing the version they think should work they make basic science mistakes. The part where they then take it over the top and force things to blow up? That's where the money is made.
And they could bring the boffins in after the failure to explain the real science, so as not to give away the ending (which most people can see coming a mile away anyhow, owing to the fact that they passed a science class at some point).
And a lot of the experiments are borderline enough while not being totally self-defeating that the result may be surprising but true.
However, they make positive and negative conclusions using blatantly faulty experiments (false controls, breaches of protocol, etc.) and then get reamed for it on their website and have to eat crow, when pretty much anyone who'd done even a cursory review could have told them they were making a mess of it. It's clear they sometimes do not care if they're proving anything or not, whether the deviation from their original intent has anything to do with "good TV" or not.
They mail it in sometimes. Which I have no doubt has caused more than one person to stop watching consistently, mini-gun madness or no.
They won't can Adam. Where would they find someone who's simultaneously so devious and so ignorant of scientific fact?
They tried to un-stupid the show a little when they brought in Grant, who actually seems to have passed a science class at some time in his past, but even he seems to have lost the ability to keep them from walking straight into unphysical presumptions.
All that production budget and they can't spend a few minutes a week phoning a real scientist to ask if their ideas to prove/disprove the myths aren't just more myths? They only seem to spend on "explosives experts", but that's their insurance company talking. I guess the insurance company cares if someone gets blown up, but not if someone gets stupider thinking it's being made smarter.
Still. The show is too much fun to stop watching.
Just what is a "Senior Product Counsel"?
Google is making things up as it goes along and hoping you'll believe only the last thing they tell you.
They're keeping the data. And using it. And profiting from it. As long as you don't stop them. And how can you? Except by not giving it to them, by never using the Internet.
Government officials making false statements are performing illegal acts. Saying you can not copy the laws is false. The state is saying you can not copy the laws. And so on.
No, it's the result of allowing the people to elect the person who spends the most on a campaign.
Can you find the website? No, because its domain no longer exists.
What are things you can't find? They're lost.
The website was lost. So was the domain, but that's semantics.
Title is correct.
How far is it from Antarctica?
But we're grading on a curve ever since 2000 so he can be President if he wants to be, even with these grades.
Greg Mankiw was right.
Economics is a load of bullshit.
If you can quadruple productivity of well-paid individuals by giving them junk jewelry and alpha-wave stimulation, then you really shouldn't have had to pay them well in the first place.
I don't remember much else about this book, but the idea of a giant city-building stands out.
_Oath of Fealty_, by Larry Niven and Jerry Pournelle.
http://www.amazon.com/Oath-Fealty-Larry-Niven/dp/0671532278
Harmless?
Sounds like he stole $390K from someone.
Jean Valjean he ain't.
Okay. Go do that. Congress is right over there.
We'll be here dealing with realistic problems.
Only if you're the sort of feeb who goes to restaurants where they make that sort of display for their patrons on their birthday.
If you really want that song to be "in the public domain", you're going to have to pay its owners for the rights and then donate it to the public yourself.
Did your parents pay a royalty to sing that song to you?
No?
Then what is unjust about it?
The authors do not harass the public. They only ensure that big corporations do not coopt their intellectual property for their own profit without paying a fair share. If the corporations are so penurious that they will sing an annoyingly unsatisfying birthday song to you instead, then your problem is with the corporation, not with the copyright on the song you want to have sung to yourself and 193 strangers in a public place by paid employees of the corporation.
As for Steamboat Willie, that's a matter of ending the misconception being written into our laws that corporations are beings with the rights of people.
No, it's still true. AMD combined their x86 with NexGen's and kept their reliance on Intel.
Plus, AMD and Intel have a continuing technology-sharing agreement. It also keeps AMD from being able to sell its CPU business or even to stop making CPUs, either of which would end AMD's or the buyer's right to use Intel IP but would grant Intel full, irrevocable rights to use the AMD IP it now uses.
AMD might be able to sell the NexGen IP, but by now that's a few % of the value in any x86-compatible CPU.
AMD is pretty much tanked anyway. It's selling off bits and pieces to keep the lights on (its loans are called if its cash drops below some huge number, so even though they have over a billion dollars in the bank they are acting like they're nearly broke). But by the time it's done it will have to realize it can't ever be profitable at the CPU business. It's too far behind in both circuit and technology to compete at a profit in mainstream or high-end, and Intel isn't leaving it the low-end markets any more. AMD doesn't even have a chip to play in Atom's space. They're done for.
I think that this is more or less the point. California has lost sight of 'risk management' in favor of 'risk avoidance'.
Democratic governments are not rational. They are based on the faulty assumption that plural politics is reasoning thought. It is likewise irrational for the electorate to allow them to believe that, but we do (and by "we" I mean "all of you who haven't clued up yet and if I wasn't in the minority this would be fixed by now").
However, as Mr. Churchill will explain to you, despite this flaw in the democratic forms of government, the rest that now exist are worse.
LEDs are encased in plastic. Quite a lot of it.
Consumers are not at risk unless they start chewing on the LEDs and actually manage to get into them. And then maybe not until they inhale the chip inside.
The risk would be to those who work in plants producing Gallium Arsenide itself. Anywhere it's heated enough to cause gaseous emission. They should be careful.
Yes, it is a total joke of bureaucratic stupidity.
But then, look at the person at the top of this government and ask yourself if it isn't the best he could have come up with.
Personally, I'm surprised it's in alphabetical order.
Suing the property gets around the shell corporations that are set up so that essentially nobody owns the property.
The suer still has to have a case and the judge still has to agree.
Does this mean I now have to actually go to /. to post on /.?
Man. I need to win the Microsoft Lottery.
Depends on what they want it to do.
nVidia doesn't make anything. They contract out to TSMC, Chartered, etc.
If nVidia has a black-box version of the x86, licensing is irrelevant and Intel can do nothing about it. Montalvo Systems is doing a black-box x86, and doing it well enough that Sun bailed them out when they were running out of money in April.
AMD's problem is AMD got its x86 know-how from Intel's own documentation, so AMD is Intel's bitch forever, or until AMD runs itself into the ground, which at this point is rapidly approaching.
But you have a problem.
The specs and comments do not always match the code. Especially after a few dozen late-date revisions to fix bugs.
Code has to be readable. Otherwise you might as well be coding in binary and commenting it.
The whole point of high-level languages was to make it easy for humans to tell computers what to do.
The point of much of perl seems to be to make it take fewer bytes of source.
Perl is just plain hard to maintain.
Very few people know how not to use all the things that obfuscate a perl program.
Even good perl programmers have trouble understanding perl code written by other good perl programmers who use different idiomatic constructs.
And not many people are learning Perl as deeply as they did when it was newer, which makes it even worse as a maintenance problem, and a drag on developing your entry-level maintainers into good programmers.
Bees do forage near the hive. Why anyone believes they don't is a mystery. Perhaps they have never had a beehive near their house.