If a bailout of Automakers is going to happen, then Tesla, as a domestic automaker, should get some part of the package.
They sell cars and hire staff, generating wealth by way of commerce for the nation as a whole. Everyone from UPS drivers to loans officers can be affected by such a downturn, and can be helped if Tesla remains a going concern.
Who they sell to is irrelevant; some day the idea is to sell ordinary folks cars too, but you need to generate some cash to do that. Building cars and selling them to people who can afford them is a pretty good way to do that.
I won't address whether there should be a bailout at all, since it would be off-topic, but I would love to.
Firstly, try not to confuse "America" with the United States of America. The Americas extend from the southern tip of South America to the Arctic, and includes a large number of Islands along the way. Canada is in America. Brazil in in America. Costa Rica is in America. And, the United States of America is in America.
Secondly, I said nothing about Lewis and Clark and I would put that down to the fact that I was not thinking of them.
They used information that was gleaned from those who came before... in no particular order and with no attempt to be comprehensive, the likes of The Hudsons Bay Company, The Spanish arm of the Catholic Church, the armies and navies of the Spanish, British, French, Portuguese, Dutch and Russians, later the same military branches of the modern Nations that eventually formed, the adventurers of the Gold Rush(es), the nomadic native tribes, Indian scouts, the cattle ranchers, botanists, the pirates and privateers, the slave traders, horse traders, gun runners, whisky traders, and, of course, the hunter.
More knowledge of any area is known, and more is lost with the passing of each generation of locals, than ever is put to paper by cartographers and surveyors. Lewis and Clark, for their part, used the primitive maps that came before them as the basis for planning their expedition in the first place. Accuracy is, in itself, not a measure of whether a map exists or not. It must be so; the degree of accuracy is always limited. The most current maps of today can be wrong in a very short time; the earth changes daily.
Regardless of the purpose of their situation, Europeans mapped their travels regardless of the business that put them there in the first place. The Americas, like everywhere else on Earth, were mapped by the work of untold thousands, not an identifiable few.
Truly awesome video and a truly awesome creature visible for the first time. Awesome might even be a bit understated.
But, the manner in which it was discovered? As ordinary as dirt. Face it... imperial expansion, military exercises and exploration of the furthest corners of the earth, and beyond, and below, are all pretty much the province of the miner, the soldier, the geologist, the imperialist paying those salaries. There is nothing new about how this was found... it's how EVERYTHING is found. The hunter finds the range and extent of the animals in the local area. The mapping of America was done by fur traders and those seeking treasure. You could go on and on.
There are those who oppose commercial enterprise, who oppose war and the exercises that preparation for war entail, who find man is essentially unkind to both man and the world he lives in. But, they learn from the adventures and the wallets of the "Bad Man".
That Shell released this video is hardly a surprise. Our entire knowledge of the world around us is essentially paid for by those like Shell Oil and those who came before them. Shell Oil is as interested in advancing our knowledge as anyone; perhaps more so because they intend to live in this world where this particular creature was found.
To imply evil intent is really off base... they have plenty of opportunity to be evil the markets, on Capital Hill, at the UN, or the WTO. Note that few endangered species are likely to be found in those places, that is the environment of man, and is also the place where you are most likely to encounter the environmentalist, PETA, and the like.
They don't go a mile or more under the ocean's surface... Shell Oil does, though.
I have never met anyone who works in the field for companies like Shell who is not far more aware of the world around them than those who occupy the cities and rail against the destruction of our environment. They have tremendous respect for the environment and the absolute wonder of the world we live in. Those who sit at their computers or write letters about banning plastic bags have no concept of the outdoors, usually. In fact, they rarely go about exploring the very city they live in.
"... Can we be sued for IP infringement, theft, or whatever?..."
Absolutely, yes.
"Whatever" is amongst the most popular grounds for lawsuits.
You (and I) can be sued for essentially anything, from serving coffee with breakfast, to not serving coffee with breakfast.
Life in America is perhaps best described as journey that presents endless opportunity for litigation. Most people squander the chance to instigate a few thousand potential actions every day of their lives.
Don't make the mistake of assuming your employers would do the same, once it's clear that you no longer are of Earthly use to them.
What is this, 2008? You know, I might be a little too harsh here. Who knows, maybe this was not obvious to these guys. Or maybe it was, but took a really long time to test it all out. But, as someone who is familiar with Bird Hunting, I can tell you that banning of lead in Bird Shot (shotgun shells) began right about the time the first Apple Computer (no, not the Apple ][ ) arrived. The US banned it for bird hunting in 1991. Today, it's more-or-less banned everywhere on Earth where they make any attempt at all to regulate hunting.
Ammunition manufacturers offered various alloys in it's place, but by far the best substitute has pretty much always been Bismuth. A little grumbling about the extra cost pretty much sums up the biggest objection. Cheaper alternatives exist (alloys, typically), but every single one of them is not as good at mimicking Lead without the toxicity as Bismuth. And you can buy Bismuth or Bismuth alloy shotgun shells all over the world today.
Wasn't this a fairly obvious place to look; a fairly obvious material to test? Why did it take so long?
Quote: "... "A data center in the Netherlands using this approach only has to use chillers 11 days a year."
Reply: Umm.. yeah... the netherlands is generally a cold place. Not really saying much if the listener knows a little something about geography and weather...."
I can't believe this reply to an actually informative post is modded 5/insightful. So, by this reply's logic, a blowtorch in the Netherlands is colder than a blowtorch in Arizona, thus the lesser need to cool the sealed, temperature and humidity controlled room the blowtorch is in. I suppose an Intel CPU running the identical load is magically cooler in the Netherlands as well.
It's settled then. No need to try to sell this one to Microsoft, since Redmond Washington and Amsterdam, Netherlands have remarkably similar average temperatures. In fact, do we need cooling AT ALL in Washington State? Anyone-Who-Knows-Anything-About-Geography-And-Weather could answer that, of course.
Redmond, Washington: Lowest AVG temp for Redmond: January 41F; August 66F Overnight lows: coolest January 32F; Highest August 55F Daytime highs: coolest January 46F; Highest August 69F
Amsterdam, Netherlands Lowest AVG temp for Amsterdam: January 37F; August 62F Overnight lows: coolest February 32F; Highest August 55F Daytime highs: coolest January 41F; Highest August 69F
[Source: WeatherReports dotcom]
Amsterdam has 19 co-location data centres, next highest number is Schiphol-Rijk with 4.
"... and a handful of *hogs hair* brushes (not metal brushes, obviously, and not nylon, not so obviously)
If you can't order from a supply company, then you will spend more,..."
On the chemicals, perhaps. I get alcohol from the "Auction Mart" by the gallon for cheap; they auction livestock. you could try a Veterinary Supply place as well.
Another term for "Hogs Hair" is "bristle"; go to any paint store (cheapest) or artist supply shop (expensive) and buy them.
Bristle brushes are used for oil paint; synthetic for latex, to help you hunt them down in the store.
I highly recommend against use of a hair dryer to dry out electronics, and in most cases, anything else, hair excepted. You are very likely to damage the device with concentrated heat.
The first thing you need to know is the normal level of relative humidity in you area. If it's reasonably low (ie not monsoon season) then all you need is air circulation, not heat.
I have recovered many water damaged items. A typical example would be full immersion of a digital camera, a rather challenging project due to it's high density, use of cements in lens elements, motor drives, etc.
Number one, no question whatsoever, is to remove the battery immediately after removal from the wet environment.
So, as for this particular problem, any device that has a battery and has sat for a day or more after immersion is probably toast and not worth the effort. These days, some rather surprising electronics contain batteries (to retain memory in power outages, for example); open them up and check thoroughly.
If there is a battery in it, it's probably "done for" right now. Only worth the recovery effort if you need data off the device; it won't live long even if you do get it up and running.
Corrosion begins the moment you remove an item from the wet environment and place it in an oxygen rich environment, like open air. In fact, broadly speaking, as long as the item is submerged it's fine.
Nikon, for example, if you call them about a camera that has been submerged accidentally, (besides the advice about batteries above) will recommend any camera that has been immersed remain in water until the moment it's technician examines it... this means shipping the unit in water if necessary. The service department can then immediately apply the appropriate anti-corrosion solvent before any serious corrosion has a chance to start.
I normally don't send stuff to Nikon or anyone else for that matter; if you do expect a hefty bill (at least 3 figures, could be more) with no guarantees. Not worth it for most stuff.
But, I do remove the battery and then set the device in front of a good fan for 3 days or so. If it's raining, leave it there until it's 3 days after the rain stops, or if you live in Seattle and it's winter, at least a very long time.
For electronics, there are safe cleaning compounds that can be used almost anywhere on the device, and can be used for immersion if necessary. You will need large amounts, and the stuff is not cheap, but depending on your gear may be worthwhile. A quick-and-dirty substitute is automotive Brake Cleaner. These chemicals attack corrosion, displace moisture, and evaporate leaving zero residue.
For cosmetic cleaning, like faceplates, knobs, etc, I use Bon Ami Foaming Cleanser but that product is not available outside Canada. Try a foaming glass cleanser, but be sure it's safe for chrome, aluminum, and painted surfaces before you use your substitute.
There is no "air conditioning" peak. The author is projecting either his own behavior, or the local demand curve peculiar to his area, onto the world power demand curve.
The "cooking supper and coming home from work peak", however, is a well known phenomena that dates back to the very beginning of the power grid itself.
"... Charge her with something else, something valid, I'd get behind it...."
I am also perplexed that the authorities seem to be searching, reaching even, to lay a charge. Where I'm from this is a clear case of Criminal Negligence Causing Death, which carries the same penalty as murder.
Criminal Negligence is where someone does something where the perpretrator knew, or should have known, that their actions could result in harm.
This case is the result of a series of planned, deliberate acts over a period of time by an adult, a parent no less, acting against a child. Legally, in my jurisdiction, it's a slam-dunk.
I guess I shouldn't have to say I'm not in the US, but again I'm perplexed that they can't seem to find a more appropriate charge on the books to use under the circumstances.
"... On a historical note, the concept of a time zone was introduced by the railroad companies, who found that it was incredibly difficult for them to make train schedules where each individual town on the route would have its own definition of time...."
That's the concept of "Standard Time", introduced in England to keep railroad schedules in order. There were no "zones"; everyone used the same time.
Naturally, that didn't work in North America, so the North American railroads had many solutions, essentially solar time based, that varied depending on where you went. Two railroads typically used two different time offsets, so schedules were still a nightmare.
The concept of "Time Zones", (which became International Time Zones in 1884), was introduced by Sir Sanford Fleming, who was a railroad engineer for the Canadian Pacific Railway. Fleming proposed staggering Standard Time into zones of 15 degrees (which is equal to one hour of solar time). He was able to get North American railroads to adopt Time Zones in 1883 and then spearheaded a conference in 1884 (Washington DC) which agreed to adopt the concept in the 25 nations that attended. It expanded worldwide from there.
"... The sun coming up at 4am is not a cool thing..." "... No. It's called living in high latitudes...."
I followed the whole "I lived in Japan" thread for a while. The sun coming up at 4AM I can understand... I live it. I also know why it comes up that early, and I even know why Daylight Savings Time is lunacy when you live in a place like that.
But, then some post says the sun goes down at 7PM. WTF?
So, I checked some of the links provided to verify sunrise and sunset for Tokyo. Sure enough, in summer, it's roughly 4AM and 7PM. For comparison, places like where I live (and similar to London, England mentioned in a post) the official sunrise in June is 4:51~4:49AM.
But the sunset is 9:15 to 9:21 PM.
I Googled Tokyo's Latitude/Longitude. Sure enough, it's at 35 degrees North. I thought there is no way the sun should be coming up at 4AM local time when you're at 35 degrees North (a place like that should be further north) and there's also no way the sun should be going down at 7PM at that latitude (such a location should be further south).
In other words, the whole Tokyo thread is doesn't make sense to me... it seems an aberration.
Then I checked the Tokyo Time Zone in respect to the longitude. What do you know... they basically are in the proper zone. 4AM to 7PM is, apparently, normal. So, I checked the North American Time Zones in respect to the longitude. What do we find? We are the guys why are in the "wrong" time zones...
In the US the Eastern Time zone extends much further west than it's "supposed" to. Same for the Central Time Zone. The Mountain Time Zone covers about half the area it should, with much of it's natural zone in Central and part of MT extending into what should be Pacific. The Pacific Zone is, remarkably, reasonably close, at least in comparison.
So, nobody in North America really knows when they're supposed to be getting out of bed, or going to sleep. In fact, DST in many parts of the US simply corrects to the proper Standard Time zone for your location on Earth. Who knew that Tampa, under Eastern Daylight Time, is simply at it's geographically determined Central Standard Time?
So, what has Japan's experience with Daylight Savings Time to do with DST in North America? Nothing.
By the way, from the above you can also figure out that DST is worthless in northern latitudes. Trading an hour to 5 AM for an hour to 11 PM is not such a hot option. If you're not sure why, have some children.
I'm not trying to defend Steve or even Apple. Bill and Microsoft have to share some of the blame, and I'm pulling out the stops and sending Real, Inc straight to hell. The short answer is the video wars are tiring, and consumers are simply tired of playing. No, I mean it.
Real is pure evil proto-spyware. Quicktime and Windows Media have fought it out for... lets see here... more than a decade? Can that be right? You bet it can.
So, the default Lowest-Common-Denominator format is Flash.
This-Is-Not-News.
It works, period. Quality? Not really there, actually. No, don't flame me. It's is truly a LCD format, a decade after video-on-the-desktop became a reality for both software and hardware. You could watch a decent quality 240x320 video in 1995. That, ultimately, is a very sad thing to say out loud, because this is 2008.
Flash is really not that great. Quality is frankly pathetic. I think that's what Steve was getting at.
But...
You can view it on pretty much every computer today. Flash 1; QuickTime/WMV/Real 0. It's widely supported on the web itself; every browser plays it when the page embeds it. Flash 1; Quicktime/WMV/Real 0. It's not so great quality wise, but content providers WANT acceptable-but-not-one-pixel-more quality. Flash 1; Quicktime/WMV/Real 0.
What Steve, who you have to admit has this thing about quality, dislikes about Flash is the cheezy quality of the videos. I don't blame him nor can I say he is wrong. They are most certainly slow to load, CPU intensive, choppy/blocky/blurry things. But they work.
Steve wants video that looks good and works. I can't say he's wrong. Flash is weak in that area more than others.
So, let's put it into perspective here. Everyone talks about Blue-Ray vs DVD-HD but the real format war is still ongoing, and arguably less worth fighting over.
Can't we agree on a web video standard, where the codecs are built into every OS, consume reasonable resources, has some measure of copy protection ** and are viewable on everyone's OS, including the fringe OS's like Linux (which would not be a fringe if someone was selling it... market share is more than just market share)?
I have my favorites. Don't get me wrong here. But, the video wars are too long with no winner in sight. I agree that Flash is not the ideal format, it's not even as good as at least 2 out of the three alternatives. But, Adobe has a vested interest in getting rich off of every OS out there, by controlling the creation of content, not the rest of the stuff. Apple, MIcrosoft and Real all had that goal in mind back in the early 90's; they've forgotten what they're fighting for now.
** Cheezy Quality = the modern day copy protection. Don't dismiss the value of it to content providers; they don't.
80. (1) Subject to subsection (2), the act of reproducing all or any substantial part of
(a) a musical work embodied in a sound recording,
(b) a performer's performance of a musical work embodied in a sound recording, or
(c) a sound recording in which a musical work, or a performer's performance of a musical work, is embodied
onto an audio recording medium for the private use of the person who makes the copy does not constitute an infringement of the copyright in the musical work, the performer's performance or the sound recording.
(2) Subsection (1) does not apply if the act described in that subsection is done for the purpose of doing any of the following in relation to any of the things referred to in paragraphs (1)(a) to (c):
(a) selling or renting out, or by way of trade exposing or offering for sale or rental;
(b) distributing, whether or not for the purpose of trade;
(c) communicating to the public by telecommunication; or
(d) performing, or causing to be performed, in public...."
Pay particular attention to Section 80 (2) (b), which is clear enough to me, but if not to you, feel free to search the usual legal decisions where you will find that you can't give the copy to anyone, ever, and the only legal way to dispose of it is to destroy it so it can't inadvertently find itself in someone's possession.
"... Don't they have a tax on all blank media to somewhat "compensate" for illegal copies?
If the law were fair, making a copy of any copyrighted work on media bought in Canada would be totally legal...."
May as well get the nit-picking out of the way. It's not a criticism of your post, but for readers of the thread, we may as well get it right.
"... a tax on all blank media..." I think it's fashionable to refer to it as a tax, but it doesn't meet my definition. The Federal Government collects the money on behalf of CIRA [equivalent to RIAA in the US] who distributes it as they see fit to artists. CIRA is not a Government entity and there are no restrictions as to how they may go about determining who gets the cash (which is another story altogether; short answer: Brittany Spears gets lots and indy artists get nothing). The Government remits 100% of the amount collected and pays for the administration out of general revenue; in other words it collects the money on behalf of a third party, has no say in how it's distributed or spent, and does so without compensation; ie at a loss. Call me crazy, but on my planet taxes are, at a minimum, revenue-positive.
It's also very common to hear people complain that the levy is new and that it first arrived when CD-Rs came on the scene. This is untrue; there have been levies on such things as cassette tapes of a quality suitable for music copying for nearly 30 years in Canada. The US has also experimented with levies; DAT recorders are subject to similar levy distributed to the RIAA in the US; the most significant difference being it's applied to the recording hardware rather than the recording media.
"... illegal copies?..." Under the Copyright Act 1998 [Canada] there are legal copies and there are illegal copies. So, there is no "tax on blank media" to compensate anyone for "illegal copies". Just like in the US you can be subject to civil liability and in contrast to the US there are also criminal (felony-only; no misdemeanor option) penalties for illegal copies leading to deprivation of liberty, property and income for offenders.
If you were to live in Canada and own a "legal copy", it would be easy to describe: A copy you, and only you, made personally for your own personal use. You and only you must have operated whatever equipment was used to create the copy, and you must keep the copied version in your possession or destroy it.
A copy made by your brother and given to you? Go to jail. A copy made by your son and loaned to you? Go to jail. A copy that was playing on an iPod/Music System while you got a haircut in a salon? Go to jail. A copy you found in the trunk of a car you bought? Go to jail. A copy you bought? Go to jail. Copies you made on media you paid a levy on and sold at a flea market? Go to jail. A copy that contained video? Go to jail.
"... making a copy of any copyrighted work..."
Only audio recordings can be exempted under the Personal Copying provision of the Copyright Act [Canada]. Video or the video portion of an audio-visual work cannot be copied under any circumstances, for example. Ditto for virtually all other works protected by copyright.
There is one other provision that/.'ers might find interesting: In Canada you have a non-revokable right to make backup copies of any computer program, something that many EULA's prohibit. Of course, like any contract, since that provision is specifically contradicted in law in Canada it cannot be enforced by any EULA, and also like any contract, that does not make the balance of the EULA any less enforceable than it would be without the invalid provision.
This is really an example of unintended consequences. The music industry has always, since it's inception, re-invented the format to prod sales. With analog formats, it worked and worked well enough that most people ended up buying the same music on more than one format.
A nice income, if you can get it: replace a perfectly good thing by reselling the exact same product, in a different package, to the same people. The hardware manufacturers played along, as they were playing the same game, from a different place. Both prospered, to a certain extent.
The thing was, though, that this was to a large extent, a side business. The "main" business, selling new music to music lovers, carried on as before. Today's artist has to be released on today's format. It's only when today's artist is old enough to be yesterday's format that you can re-sell his music on the new format. Naturally, yesterday's song can never be as lucrative as today's top 10 artist or song.
So, we have a business model that supplements the main business, and generates tidy profits in the process. Who would not want to keep that cash cow going?
And so, in the late 1970's, the CD managed to become the next incarnation of the format re-sell. By the end of the 1980's it was working as well as it ever did; in other words CDs spurred the greatest sales surge the industry had ever experienced, just like the cassette tape had spurred a similar record sales volume, just like the LP record had before that, just like the 45 single had before that.
From the Labels' perspective, this was deja vu all over again. The model had been re-affirmed, and the next new format was already being developed to run the next incarnation of this very simple, very successful strategy.
It was gravy sales; money that was created out of nothing, since the format push was not really essential to the music push side of it. It was a great business idea that worked, plain and simple.
But, CDs are digital. When those sales records were being broken in the 80's, and when the early 90's brought even greater sales volumes, who would see that the whole business was already doomed, and the day the doom began was a decade earlier?
By the dawn of the 21st century, labels found themselves being derided for being late to realize what ordinary people saw as obvious, but who could blame them? The damn thing was working one day, failing the next. It was supposed to go on forever like it had in the past. What kind of idiot would be even thinking along the lines where this is going to end suddenly?
An analog song can be copied, and copied with very high quality. But, not instantly, and not remotely, and not with massive distribution, and not with a shipping weight that must be measured by physicists rather than spring scales or tonns of ocean displacement. It must be copied in (more or less) real time, and duplicated in (more or less) real time, and physically distributed.
DRM has nothing to do with the problem, and nothing to do with the solution. Because the labels were so taken by surprise (as little as 10 years ago we have... another record year for CD sales) they reacted with measures that accurately reflect their panicked state. So, they try DRM. They would, and will, try anything else they think might work, too. That includes refusing, then embracing, then who-knows-what-ing digital downloads with DRM.
It's not just a few CDs they're panicked about. It's the whole model where the CD was supposed to be replaced by the [whatever] in, on average, every 15-20 years. That's over.
The panic is real. They have to come up with something that can't be. And they (now) know it.
"... The ACLU believes the intent of election law is to ensure voters can be notified immediately of a voting error and be able to make a second-chance vote...."
Okay, either this is a rather new thing the lawmakers came up with for No-I-Give-Up-Tell-Me reasons, or it's a poorly crafted law with unintended consequences, or the ACLU is reading a lot into the legislation that simply doesn't exist. One thing I know, however, is a vote is a vote, in any nation on Earth. Second chances are strictly disallowed. Period. So, what does the ACLU want, really?
Does "voting error" mean something besides what I think it means? How, exactly, can there be a voting error in the first place? The voter votes. Done. The voter "made a mistake?" Same answer: "Done. Try better next time, sir."
Is someone saying a voting error refers to something the elector does not do? That it is somehow built into the system? Or even possible? I mean, I know what Election Fraud is. I know why Elections always have audit trails. I know that no elector can change his or her vote, even while the election is still ongoing. That's the way all elections work, everywhere they take them seriously.
What possible error can there be? Why am I not also reading stories in the news with the phrases "tar and feathers" and "run out of town on a rail" in them?
"... They probably send back a GIF to make the communication look more inconspicuous..."
Sending back the.gif file is a way to make sure you are a "real computer" at the particular address their "phone home" data says you are at. If you were spoofing the address, the gif file would not make the trip, so to speak, and they would know that.
They don't really "send back a gif", per se. They send the url to the gif to your computer, your computer goes to the url to fetch the gif, and... bingo. There's proof. It's exactly the same method used by spammers in eMail. The gif in the eMail is not embedded in the message; your computer has to ask for it at the very moment you display the eMail message. The beauty of this is there is also a time stamp on it, of course.
So, it's a check on the validity of the original data, or, you might say it's a check on the validity of the evidence.
"... The most fuel efficient vehicle, depending on how you want to define it, is either the footman, the officer on bicycle (vehicle), or the office on the Segway (powered vehicle)...."
That's why I wrote, and you failed to either read, or failed to comprehend,... motor vehicle....
"... You speak as though it's an either/or propisition [sic]...."
No, you read it that way. Unlike the author of the/. topic, I feel we should not label a pretty fuel efficient mode of transport with a bona fide law enforcement pedigree "less than green", and that was the gist of my post.
Police need boats; they get maybe 4 MPG (or less). Police need helicopters; a low-power turbine engine (eg a PT6A with 750 (S)HP ) burns 1.5 gallons of Jet fuel a minute, and a helicopter needs 10 minutes of run-up before it can move, period. From where I sit, that's "less than green".
"... So we can't do anything unless we do the worst first? That's silly...."
Nope. Test this, check out that. Whatever. The NYPD are welcome, in fact I encourage them, to think about the whole environmental impact thing, and what they can do about it. Someone else implies I think we should be using Electric Helicopters, another suggests that I suggested we replace 'copters with scooters. Well, just throw those ideas out there, kids, as soon as it comes into your heads; that's how this Brain-Storming thing works. Just don't call a pretty efficient tool "less than green". That's all I meant, and that's all I said.
Yeah, they're big motorcycles. They only get 45 mpg in the city, and that's observed fuel economy, not some Science-Fiction EPA rating.
So, let's replace the most fuel efficient motor vehicle the NYPD has in the fleet because it's "less than green" and let's keep those cars, trucks, vans, helicopters, and who-knows-what else. You know, for the children.
Due to a recent security issue with Flash (All browsers; All OS's) I disabled the Flash/Shockwave plugins on my system.
On one site: 27 popups demanding I acknowledge I had no Flash plugin plus 7 demanding I download the plugin. The page stops loading until I click on the popup; loads for a second, stops again so I can acknowledge I have no Flash plugin; loads for a second, stops again...
During the next half-day, well over a hundred popups demanding I acknowledge I had, in fact, no Flash plugin. I'm not going anywhere special here. Regular news and weather sites, basically.
Call me crazy, but if Apple or Microsoft intruded in the average user's browsing experience with (I'm not exadgerating here) more than 200 insistent demands that I download their software while trying to view 10 web sites, I think the entire online world would be pissed. It is, in fact, possible to browse the internet without QuickTime or Windows Media Player plugins installed, and at worst, you get a few funny icons in your browser page windows.
Flash? A constant, insistent, whining drone. You literally have pages that pop up in front of the page you are viewing to demand you do something about this serious failure to install our plugins. It's amazing how virtually no page on the internet can survive without the Flash Plugin.
Except, if I managed to click the popups by the hundred, the pages loaded just fine, thank you. The occasional image (video start screen) was blank. And I mean occasional; most still displayed.
So, without Flash; about 80% of my browsing experience consisted of acknowledging I had no Flash Plugin. Nice.
No wonder it works on 99% of browsers. Without it, you don't make it out of the driveway.
For me, they save perfectly and always save as a complete file ( I never grab it from the cache; that's the wrong way to do the job). Like I said: 100% success rate, and I have a relatively slow connection.
Try grabbing it from the server thats sending it to the web page in the first place, and waiting until it's done before you save. The only OS or Browser-specific trick is finding that particular url, but it can be done on any system quickly and easily.
I don't trust the download links. If you are saving from the server that sends the stream to the web page in the first place, then you will see the url for the video file they embed in the player is not the same as the url for the download link. Typically it's a different file (quality, etc), and that's if the video is actually available in the first place.
Often it's a portal to another site, whether it's ad strategy, link fraud, or downloading malware. I've learned that you don't use the provided download links. Waste of time.
Online Video is a cesspool of hell, and Flash is part of the cesspool like everyone else. Currently there is a serious vulnerability in the Flash Browser Plugin on all OS's. They are no better nor worse than anyone else; although they are very restrictive as to how content creators can format the video, which makes for a more universal experience for the user. For that you get mediocre video quality and often downright poor audio quality.
I don't really see the value of "Youtube-style video embedding." What's it good for?
Flash Video files are the easiest to pull from a website; I've yet to find an embedded Flash Video file I could not save to disk. I can't say that for QuickTime; a few have eluded me. As for Windows Media, they are by far the most difficult to save to disk; I can't say I've been 100% successful on those.
Got some Flash content you think is safe? Post the url; I'll email the whole thing to you as a self-contained movie file. Guaranteed.
Give me five minutes; Flash is slower to stream than QT or WMV.
Let me just say right off the bat that I do not have any special information regarding the pricing of Nintendo products. What I do have is years of experience as an owner of a reasonably successful electronics reseller. We didn't sell consoles or games, but the industry is not so different that there is going to be that much difference. I won't offer anything in the way of secrets or inside information, so you will have to read between the lines, but broadly speaking some or all of this is going to apply. Guaranteed.
Which means I'm going to accept, without any further comment, his assertion that he "pays $246" for a Nintendo Wii console that he is supposed to sell at $249.95. I would not be the least bit surprised that he has a piece of paper somewhere that says so. And then I'm going to say that when he says he pays $246 for a console, you should not interpret that as meaning it costs him $246 for a console. If it does, he has no business being in the industry he's in.
He may be factoring in the cost of financing his buying from his wholesaler (or a company specializing in this field), but if all his inventory is off the floor plan then generally speaking he is not really making money and should get out. This is where you don't have the necessary financing so you use the inventory itself as collateral, and it's expensive financing; akin to a credit card rate for consumers compared to a bank loan rate.
Typically there is something associated with the floor plan he makes very decent profit on but he needs certain items around to get you to buy the other items, but whatever. I hope I don't have to say out loud what a game reseller would possibly have around that makes lots of profit when the consoles don't.
If he is financing his entire inventory this way he is in bigger trouble than slim console margins. Properly done, it's fine. You get $249.99 the very morning the truck drops off the items, and pay $246 some time in the near future. The $4 is yours at zero cost and zero outlay. That is profit any way you look at it. It limited by supply, but it's still profit.
The alternative is to use your own money (probably financed, but at a much, much lower rate) and seek to reduce your costs to the maximum. This is the better way to make money but your operation has to have the cash flow to do it.
In that case, the invoice price does not include any discounts he had damn well be taking advantage of if he plans to stay in business. One example: shipping discounts. These are based on a variety of factors and can vary from free shipping to a cash allowance that comes off that $246. Another: early payment discounts. Again, they vary, but if he is not paying his invoice quickly and getting the early payment discount then he should be doing something else. They vary widely, but one real-world example is take 10% off the invoice price if your payment is received within 5 days after delivery to you; others may not be so generous but they still give you something. There are volume discounts, there are deals you get at trade shows for your commitment to buy in the near future, there are cozy relationships with your supplier who may be selling you other things, which may be where the discount applies that otherwise would not had he not bought the consoles, and so on, but these are just the mundane details.
Note that if you are on the floor plan, the guy you pay the high interest rate to is the guy taking advantage of all these discounts, because he owns your inventory. A savvy reader will figure out how likely it is that this type of lender is going to pay $246 for a console that he sells for $246. Sure, that interest income is nice, but they are all about the money and don't leave any on the table if they can avoid it.
I'm not suggesting these exact opportunities exist with this exact transaction or line of business, but I am suggesting that the impossible is, well, impossible. So if the story about his cost versus his sale price is too tough to be believed, it probably
Slashdot Mirror
If a bailout of Automakers is going to happen, then Tesla, as a domestic automaker, should get some part of the package.
They sell cars and hire staff, generating wealth by way of commerce for the nation as a whole. Everyone from UPS drivers to loans officers can be affected by such a downturn, and can be helped if Tesla remains a going concern.
Who they sell to is irrelevant; some day the idea is to sell ordinary folks cars too, but you need to generate some cash to do that. Building cars and selling them to people who can afford them is a pretty good way to do that.
I won't address whether there should be a bailout at all, since it would be off-topic, but I would love to.
Firstly, try not to confuse "America" with the United States of America. The Americas extend from the southern tip of South America to the Arctic, and includes a large number of Islands along the way. Canada is in America. Brazil in in America. Costa Rica is in America. And, the United States of America is in America.
Secondly, I said nothing about Lewis and Clark and I would put that down to the fact that I was not thinking of them.
They used information that was gleaned from those who came before ... in no particular order and with no attempt to be comprehensive, the likes of The Hudsons Bay Company, The Spanish arm of the Catholic Church, the armies and navies of the Spanish, British, French, Portuguese, Dutch and Russians, later the same military branches of the modern Nations that eventually formed, the adventurers of the Gold Rush(es), the nomadic native tribes, Indian scouts, the cattle ranchers, botanists, the pirates and privateers, the slave traders, horse traders, gun runners, whisky traders, and, of course, the hunter.
More knowledge of any area is known, and more is lost with the passing of each generation of locals, than ever is put to paper by cartographers and surveyors. Lewis and Clark, for their part, used the primitive maps that came before them as the basis for planning their expedition in the first place. Accuracy is, in itself, not a measure of whether a map exists or not. It must be so; the degree of accuracy is always limited. The most current maps of today can be wrong in a very short time; the earth changes daily.
Regardless of the purpose of their situation, Europeans mapped their travels regardless of the business that put them there in the first place. The Americas, like everywhere else on Earth, were mapped by the work of untold thousands, not an identifiable few.
Truly awesome video and a truly awesome creature visible for the first time. Awesome might even be a bit understated.
But, the manner in which it was discovered? As ordinary as dirt. Face it ... imperial expansion, military exercises and exploration of the furthest corners of the earth, and beyond, and below, are all pretty much the province of the miner, the soldier, the geologist, the imperialist paying those salaries. There is nothing new about how this was found ... it's how EVERYTHING is found. The hunter finds the range and extent of the animals in the local area. The mapping of America was done by fur traders and those seeking treasure. You could go on and on.
There are those who oppose commercial enterprise, who oppose war and the exercises that preparation for war entail, who find man is essentially unkind to both man and the world he lives in. But, they learn from the adventures and the wallets of the "Bad Man".
That Shell released this video is hardly a surprise. Our entire knowledge of the world around us is essentially paid for by those like Shell Oil and those who came before them. Shell Oil is as interested in advancing our knowledge as anyone; perhaps more so because they intend to live in this world where this particular creature was found.
To imply evil intent is really off base ... they have plenty of opportunity to be evil the markets, on Capital Hill, at the UN, or the WTO. Note that few endangered species are likely to be found in those places, that is the environment of man, and is also the place where you are most likely to encounter the environmentalist, PETA, and the like.
They don't go a mile or more under the ocean's surface ... Shell Oil does, though.
I have never met anyone who works in the field for companies like Shell who is not far more aware of the world around them than those who occupy the cities and rail against the destruction of our environment. They have tremendous respect for the environment and the absolute wonder of the world we live in. Those who sit at their computers or write letters about banning plastic bags have no concept of the outdoors, usually. In fact, they rarely go about exploring the very city they live in.
" ... Can we be sued for IP infringement, theft, or whatever? ..."
Absolutely, yes.
"Whatever" is amongst the most popular grounds for lawsuits.
You (and I) can be sued for essentially anything, from serving coffee with breakfast, to not serving coffee with breakfast.
Life in America is perhaps best described as journey that presents endless opportunity for litigation. Most people squander the chance to instigate a few thousand potential actions every day of their lives.
Don't make the mistake of assuming your employers would do the same, once it's clear that you no longer are of Earthly use to them.
" ... The longer-term goal is to create a system with the level of complexity of a cat's brain.' ..."
No, it's not.
What is this, 2008?
You know, I might be a little too harsh here.
Who knows, maybe this was not obvious to these guys.
Or maybe it was, but took a really long time to test it all out.
But, as someone who is familiar with Bird Hunting, I can tell you that banning of lead in Bird Shot (shotgun shells) began right about the time the first Apple Computer (no, not the Apple ][ ) arrived.
The US banned it for bird hunting in 1991. Today, it's more-or-less banned everywhere on Earth where they make any attempt at all to regulate hunting.
Ammunition manufacturers offered various alloys in it's place, but by far the best substitute has pretty much always been Bismuth. A little grumbling about the extra cost pretty much sums up the biggest objection. Cheaper alternatives exist (alloys, typically), but every single one of them is not as good at mimicking Lead without the toxicity as Bismuth. And you can buy Bismuth or Bismuth alloy shotgun shells all over the world today.
Wasn't this a fairly obvious place to look; a fairly obvious material to test? Why did it take so long?
Quote: " ... "A data center in the Netherlands using this approach only has to use chillers 11 days a year."
Reply: Umm.. yeah... the netherlands is generally a cold place. Not really saying much if the listener knows a little something about geography and weather. ..."
I can't believe this reply to an actually informative post is modded 5/insightful.
So, by this reply's logic, a blowtorch in the Netherlands is colder than a blowtorch in Arizona, thus the lesser need to cool the sealed, temperature and humidity controlled room the blowtorch is in.
I suppose an Intel CPU running the identical load is magically cooler in the Netherlands as well.
It's settled then. No need to try to sell this one to Microsoft, since Redmond Washington and Amsterdam, Netherlands have remarkably similar average temperatures. In fact, do we need cooling AT ALL in Washington State? Anyone-Who-Knows-Anything-About-Geography-And-Weather could answer that, of course.
Redmond, Washington:
Lowest AVG temp for Redmond: January 41F; August 66F
Overnight lows: coolest January 32F; Highest August 55F
Daytime highs: coolest January 46F; Highest August 69F
Amsterdam, Netherlands
Lowest AVG temp for Amsterdam: January 37F; August 62F
Overnight lows: coolest February 32F; Highest August 55F
Daytime highs: coolest January 41F; Highest August 69F
[Source: WeatherReports dotcom]
Amsterdam has 19 co-location data centres, next highest number is Schiphol-Rijk with 4.
" ... and a handful of *hogs hair* brushes (not metal brushes, obviously, and not nylon, not so obviously)
If you can't order from a supply company, then you will spend more, ..."
On the chemicals, perhaps. I get alcohol from the "Auction Mart" by the gallon for cheap; they auction livestock. you could try a Veterinary Supply place as well.
Another term for "Hogs Hair" is "bristle"; go to any paint store (cheapest) or artist supply shop (expensive) and buy them.
Bristle brushes are used for oil paint; synthetic for latex, to help you hunt them down in the store.
I highly recommend against use of a hair dryer to dry out electronics, and in most cases, anything else, hair excepted. You are very likely to damage the device with concentrated heat.
The first thing you need to know is the normal level of relative humidity in you area. If it's reasonably low (ie not monsoon season) then all you need is air circulation, not heat.
I have recovered many water damaged items. A typical example would be full immersion of a digital camera, a rather challenging project due to it's high density, use of cements in lens elements, motor drives, etc.
Number one, no question whatsoever, is to remove the battery immediately after removal from the wet environment.
So, as for this particular problem, any device that has a battery and has sat for a day or more after immersion is probably toast and not worth the effort. These days, some rather surprising electronics contain batteries (to retain memory in power outages, for example); open them up and check thoroughly.
If there is a battery in it, it's probably "done for" right now. Only worth the recovery effort if you need data off the device; it won't live long even if you do get it up and running.
Corrosion begins the moment you remove an item from the wet environment and place it in an oxygen rich environment, like open air. In fact, broadly speaking, as long as the item is submerged it's fine.
Nikon, for example, if you call them about a camera that has been submerged accidentally, (besides the advice about batteries above) will recommend any camera that has been immersed remain in water until the moment it's technician examines it ... this means shipping the unit in water if necessary. The service department can then immediately apply the appropriate anti-corrosion solvent before any serious corrosion has a chance to start.
I normally don't send stuff to Nikon or anyone else for that matter; if you do expect a hefty bill (at least 3 figures, could be more) with no guarantees. Not worth it for most stuff.
But, I do remove the battery and then set the device in front of a good fan for 3 days or so. If it's raining, leave it there until it's 3 days after the rain stops, or if you live in Seattle and it's winter, at least a very long time.
For electronics, there are safe cleaning compounds that can be used almost anywhere on the device, and can be used for immersion if necessary. You will need large amounts, and the stuff is not cheap, but depending on your gear may be worthwhile. A quick-and-dirty substitute is automotive Brake Cleaner. These chemicals attack corrosion, displace moisture, and evaporate leaving zero residue.
For cosmetic cleaning, like faceplates, knobs, etc, I use Bon Ami Foaming Cleanser but that product is not available outside Canada. Try a foaming glass cleanser, but be sure it's safe for chrome, aluminum, and painted surfaces before you use your substitute.
There is no "air conditioning" peak. The author is projecting either his own behavior, or the local demand curve peculiar to his area, onto the world power demand curve.
The "cooking supper and coming home from work peak", however, is a well known phenomena that dates back to the very beginning of the power grid itself.
" ... Charge her with something else, something valid, I'd get behind it. ..."
I am also perplexed that the authorities seem to be searching, reaching even, to lay a charge. Where I'm from this is a clear case of Criminal Negligence Causing Death, which carries the same penalty as murder.
Criminal Negligence is where someone does something where the perpretrator knew, or should have known, that their actions could result in harm.
This case is the result of a series of planned, deliberate acts over a period of time by an adult, a parent no less, acting against a child. Legally, in my jurisdiction, it's a slam-dunk.
I guess I shouldn't have to say I'm not in the US, but again I'm perplexed that they can't seem to find a more appropriate charge on the books to use under the circumstances.
" ... On a historical note, the concept of a time zone was introduced by the railroad companies, who found that it was incredibly difficult for them to make train schedules where each individual town on the route would have its own definition of time. ..."
That's the concept of "Standard Time", introduced in England to keep railroad schedules in order. There were no "zones"; everyone used the same time.
Naturally, that didn't work in North America, so the North American railroads had many solutions, essentially solar time based, that varied depending on where you went. Two railroads typically used two different time offsets, so schedules were still a nightmare.
The concept of "Time Zones", (which became International Time Zones in 1884), was introduced by Sir Sanford Fleming, who was a railroad engineer for the Canadian Pacific Railway. Fleming proposed staggering Standard Time into zones of 15 degrees (which is equal to one hour of solar time). He was able to get North American railroads to adopt Time Zones in 1883 and then spearheaded a conference in 1884 (Washington DC) which agreed to adopt the concept in the 25 nations that attended. It expanded worldwide from there.
" ... The sun coming up at 4am is not a cool thing ..." ... No. It's called living in high latitudes. ..."
... I live it. I also know why it comes up that early, and I even know why Daylight Savings Time is lunacy when you live in a place like that.
... it seems an aberration.
... they basically are in the proper zone. 4AM to 7PM is, apparently, normal.
"
I followed the whole "I lived in Japan" thread for a while. The sun coming up at 4AM I can understand
But, then some post says the sun goes down at 7PM. WTF?
So, I checked some of the links provided to verify sunrise and sunset for Tokyo. Sure enough, in summer, it's roughly 4AM and 7PM.
For comparison, places like where I live (and similar to London, England mentioned in a post) the official sunrise in June is 4:51~4:49AM.
But the sunset is 9:15 to 9:21 PM.
I Googled Tokyo's Latitude/Longitude. Sure enough, it's at 35 degrees North. I thought there is no way the sun should be coming up at 4AM local time when you're at 35 degrees North (a place like that should be further north) and there's also no way the sun should be going down at 7PM at that latitude (such a location should be further south).
In other words, the whole Tokyo thread is doesn't make sense to me
Then I checked the Tokyo Time Zone in respect to the longitude. What do you know
So, I checked the North American Time Zones in respect to the longitude. What do we find? We are the guys why are in the "wrong" time zones...
In the US the Eastern Time zone extends much further west than it's "supposed" to. Same for the Central Time Zone. The Mountain Time Zone covers about half the area it should, with much of it's natural zone in Central and part of MT extending into what should be Pacific. The Pacific Zone is, remarkably, reasonably close, at least in comparison.
So, nobody in North America really knows when they're supposed to be getting out of bed, or going to sleep. In fact, DST in many parts of the US simply corrects to the proper Standard Time zone for your location on Earth. Who knew that Tampa, under Eastern Daylight Time, is simply at it's geographically determined Central Standard Time?
So, what has Japan's experience with Daylight Savings Time to do with DST in North America? Nothing.
By the way, from the above you can also figure out that DST is worthless in northern latitudes. Trading an hour to 5 AM for an hour to 11 PM is not such a hot option. If you're not sure why, have some children.
I'm not trying to defend Steve or even Apple. Bill and Microsoft have to share some of the blame, and I'm pulling out the stops and sending Real, Inc straight to hell. The short answer is the video wars are tiring, and consumers are simply tired of playing. No, I mean it.
... lets see here ... more than a decade? Can that be right? You bet it can.
...
... market share is more than just market share)?
Real is pure evil proto-spyware. Quicktime and Windows Media have fought it out for
So, the default Lowest-Common-Denominator format is Flash.
This-Is-Not-News.
It works, period. Quality? Not really there, actually. No, don't flame me. It's is truly a LCD format, a decade after video-on-the-desktop became a reality for both software and hardware. You could watch a decent quality 240x320 video in 1995. That, ultimately, is a very sad thing to say out loud, because this is 2008.
Flash is really not that great. Quality is frankly pathetic. I think that's what Steve was getting at.
But
You can view it on pretty much every computer today. Flash 1; QuickTime/WMV/Real 0.
It's widely supported on the web itself; every browser plays it when the page embeds it. Flash 1; Quicktime/WMV/Real 0.
It's not so great quality wise, but content providers WANT acceptable-but-not-one-pixel-more quality. Flash 1; Quicktime/WMV/Real 0.
What Steve, who you have to admit has this thing about quality, dislikes about Flash is the cheezy quality of the videos. I don't blame him nor can I say he is wrong. They are most certainly slow to load, CPU intensive, choppy/blocky/blurry things. But they work.
Steve wants video that looks good and works. I can't say he's wrong. Flash is weak in that area more than others.
So, let's put it into perspective here. Everyone talks about Blue-Ray vs DVD-HD but the real format war is still ongoing, and arguably less worth fighting over.
Can't we agree on a web video standard, where the codecs are built into every OS, consume reasonable resources, has some measure of copy protection ** and are viewable on everyone's OS, including the fringe OS's like Linux (which would not be a fringe if someone was selling it
I have my favorites. Don't get me wrong here. But, the video wars are too long with no winner in sight. I agree that Flash is not the ideal format, it's not even as good as at least 2 out of the three alternatives. But, Adobe has a vested interest in getting rich off of every OS out there, by controlling the creation of content, not the rest of the stuff. Apple, MIcrosoft and Real all had that goal in mind back in the early 90's; they've forgotten what they're fighting for now.
** Cheezy Quality = the modern day copy protection. Don't dismiss the value of it to content providers; they don't.
" ...
..."
Copying for Private Use
80. (1) Subject to subsection (2), the act of reproducing all or any substantial part of
(a) a musical work embodied in a sound recording,
(b) a performer's performance of a musical work embodied in a sound recording, or
(c) a sound recording in which a musical work, or a performer's performance of a musical work, is embodied
onto an audio recording medium for the private use of the person who makes the copy does not constitute an infringement of the copyright in the musical work, the performer's performance or the sound recording.
(2) Subsection (1) does not apply if the act described in that subsection is done for the purpose of doing any of the following in relation to any of the things referred to in paragraphs (1)(a) to (c):
(a) selling or renting out, or by way of trade exposing or offering for sale or rental;
(b) distributing, whether or not for the purpose of trade;
(c) communicating to the public by telecommunication; or
(d) performing, or causing to be performed, in public.
Pay particular attention to Section 80 (2) (b), which is clear enough to me, but if not to you, feel free to search the usual legal decisions where you will find that you can't give the copy to anyone, ever, and the only legal way to dispose of it is to destroy it so it can't inadvertently find itself in someone's possession.
" ... Don't they have a tax on all blank media to somewhat "compensate" for illegal copies?
..."
... a tax on all blank media ..."
... illegal copies? ..."
... making a copy of any copyrighted work ..."
/.'ers might find interesting:
If the law were fair, making a copy of any copyrighted work on media bought in Canada would be totally legal.
May as well get the nit-picking out of the way. It's not a criticism of your post, but for readers of the thread, we may as well get it right.
"
I think it's fashionable to refer to it as a tax, but it doesn't meet my definition. The Federal Government collects the money on behalf of CIRA [equivalent to RIAA in the US] who distributes it as they see fit to artists. CIRA is not a Government entity and there are no restrictions as to how they may go about determining who gets the cash (which is another story altogether; short answer: Brittany Spears gets lots and indy artists get nothing). The Government remits 100% of the amount collected and pays for the administration out of general revenue; in other words it collects the money on behalf of a third party, has no say in how it's distributed or spent, and does so without compensation; ie at a loss. Call me crazy, but on my planet taxes are, at a minimum, revenue-positive.
It's also very common to hear people complain that the levy is new and that it first arrived when CD-Rs came on the scene. This is untrue; there have been levies on such things as cassette tapes of a quality suitable for music copying for nearly 30 years in Canada. The US has also experimented with levies; DAT recorders are subject to similar levy distributed to the RIAA in the US; the most significant difference being it's applied to the recording hardware rather than the recording media.
"
Under the Copyright Act 1998 [Canada] there are legal copies and there are illegal copies. So, there is no "tax on blank media" to compensate anyone for "illegal copies". Just like in the US you can be subject to civil liability and in contrast to the US there are also criminal (felony-only; no misdemeanor option) penalties for illegal copies leading to deprivation of liberty, property and income for offenders.
If you were to live in Canada and own a "legal copy", it would be easy to describe:
A copy you, and only you, made personally for your own personal use. You and only you must have operated whatever equipment was used to create the copy, and you must keep the copied version in your possession or destroy it.
A copy made by your brother and given to you? Go to jail.
A copy made by your son and loaned to you? Go to jail.
A copy that was playing on an iPod/Music System while you got a haircut in a salon? Go to jail.
A copy you found in the trunk of a car you bought? Go to jail.
A copy you bought? Go to jail.
Copies you made on media you paid a levy on and sold at a flea market? Go to jail.
A copy that contained video? Go to jail.
"
Only audio recordings can be exempted under the Personal Copying provision of the Copyright Act [Canada]. Video or the video portion of an audio-visual work cannot be copied under any circumstances, for example. Ditto for virtually all other works protected by copyright.
There is one other provision that
In Canada you have a non-revokable right to make backup copies of any computer program, something that many EULA's prohibit. Of course, like any contract, since that provision is specifically contradicted in law in Canada it cannot be enforced by any EULA, and also like any contract, that does not make the balance of the EULA any less enforceable than it would be without the invalid provision.
This is really an example of unintended consequences. The music industry has always, since it's inception, re-invented the format to prod sales. With analog formats, it worked and worked well enough that most people ended up buying the same music on more than one format.
... another record year for CD sales) they reacted with measures that accurately reflect their panicked state. So, they try DRM. They would, and will, try anything else they think might work, too. That includes refusing, then embracing, then who-knows-what-ing digital downloads with DRM.
A nice income, if you can get it: replace a perfectly good thing by reselling the exact same product, in a different package, to the same people. The hardware manufacturers played along, as they were playing the same game, from a different place. Both prospered, to a certain extent.
The thing was, though, that this was to a large extent, a side business. The "main" business, selling new music to music lovers, carried on as before. Today's artist has to be released on today's format. It's only when today's artist is old enough to be yesterday's format that you can re-sell his music on the new format. Naturally, yesterday's song can never be as lucrative as today's top 10 artist or song.
So, we have a business model that supplements the main business, and generates tidy profits in the process. Who would not want to keep that cash cow going?
And so, in the late 1970's, the CD managed to become the next incarnation of the format re-sell. By the end of the 1980's it was working as well as it ever did; in other words CDs spurred the greatest sales surge the industry had ever experienced, just like the cassette tape had spurred a similar record sales volume, just like the LP record had before that, just like the 45 single had before that.
From the Labels' perspective, this was deja vu all over again. The model had been re-affirmed, and the next new format was already being developed to run the next incarnation of this very simple, very successful strategy.
It was gravy sales; money that was created out of nothing, since the format push was not really essential to the music push side of it. It was a great business idea that worked, plain and simple.
But, CDs are digital. When those sales records were being broken in the 80's, and when the early 90's brought even greater sales volumes, who would see that the whole business was already doomed, and the day the doom began was a decade earlier?
By the dawn of the 21st century, labels found themselves being derided for being late to realize what ordinary people saw as obvious, but who could blame them? The damn thing was working one day, failing the next. It was supposed to go on forever like it had in the past. What kind of idiot would be even thinking along the lines where this is going to end suddenly?
An analog song can be copied, and copied with very high quality. But, not instantly, and not remotely, and not with massive distribution, and not with a shipping weight that must be measured by physicists rather than spring scales or tonns of ocean displacement. It must be copied in (more or less) real time, and duplicated in (more or less) real time, and physically distributed.
DRM has nothing to do with the problem, and nothing to do with the solution. Because the labels were so taken by surprise (as little as 10 years ago we have
It's not just a few CDs they're panicked about. It's the whole model where the CD was supposed to be replaced by the [whatever] in, on average, every 15-20 years. That's over.
The panic is real. They have to come up with something that can't be. And they (now) know it.
" ... The ACLU believes the intent of election law is to ensure voters can be notified immediately of a voting error and be able to make a second-chance vote. ..."
Okay, either this is a rather new thing the lawmakers came up with for No-I-Give-Up-Tell-Me reasons, or it's a poorly crafted law with unintended consequences, or the ACLU is reading a lot into the legislation that simply doesn't exist. One thing I know, however, is a vote is a vote, in any nation on Earth. Second chances are strictly disallowed. Period. So, what does the ACLU want, really?
Does "voting error" mean something besides what I think it means? How, exactly, can there be a voting error in the first place? The voter votes. Done. The voter "made a mistake?" Same answer: "Done. Try better next time, sir."
Is someone saying a voting error refers to something the elector does not do? That it is somehow built into the system? Or even possible? I mean, I know what Election Fraud is. I know why Elections always have audit trails. I know that no elector can change his or her vote, even while the election is still ongoing. That's the way all elections work, everywhere they take them seriously.
What possible error can there be? Why am I not also reading stories in the news with the phrases "tar and feathers" and "run out of town on a rail" in them?
" ... They probably send back a GIF to make the communication look more inconspicuous ..."
.gif file is a way to make sure you are a "real computer" at the particular address their "phone home" data says you are at. If you were spoofing the address, the gif file would not make the trip, so to speak, and they would know that.
... bingo. There's proof. It's exactly the same method used by spammers in eMail. The gif in the eMail is not embedded in the message; your computer has to ask for it at the very moment you display the eMail message. The beauty of this is there is also a time stamp on it, of course.
Sending back the
They don't really "send back a gif", per se. They send the url to the gif to your computer, your computer goes to the url to fetch the gif, and
So, it's a check on the validity of the original data, or, you might say it's a check on the validity of the evidence.
" ... The most fuel efficient vehicle, depending on how you want to define it, is either the footman, the officer on bicycle (vehicle), or the office on the Segway (powered vehicle). ..."
... motor vehicle ....
... You speak as though it's an either/or propisition [sic]. ..."
/. topic, I feel we should not label a pretty fuel efficient mode of transport with a bona fide law enforcement pedigree "less than green", and that was the gist of my post.
... So we can't do anything unless we do the worst first? That's silly. ..."
That's why I wrote, and you failed to either read, or failed to comprehend,
"
No, you read it that way. Unlike the author of the
Police need boats; they get maybe 4 MPG (or less). Police need helicopters; a low-power turbine engine (eg a PT6A with 750 (S)HP ) burns 1.5 gallons of Jet fuel a minute, and a helicopter needs 10 minutes of run-up before it can move, period. From where I sit, that's "less than green".
"
Nope. Test this, check out that. Whatever. The NYPD are welcome, in fact I encourage them, to think about the whole environmental impact thing, and what they can do about it. Someone else implies I think we should be using Electric Helicopters, another suggests that I suggested we replace 'copters with scooters. Well, just throw those ideas out there, kids, as soon as it comes into your heads; that's how this Brain-Storming thing works. Just don't call a pretty efficient tool "less than green". That's all I meant, and that's all I said.
Yeah, they're big motorcycles. They only get 45 mpg in the city, and that's observed fuel economy, not some Science-Fiction EPA rating.
So, let's replace the most fuel efficient motor vehicle the NYPD has in the fleet because it's "less than green" and let's keep those cars, trucks, vans, helicopters, and who-knows-what else. You know, for the children.
Due to a recent security issue with Flash (All browsers; All OS's) I disabled the Flash/Shockwave plugins on my system.
...
On one site: 27 popups demanding I acknowledge I had no Flash plugin plus 7 demanding I download the plugin. The page stops loading until I click on the popup; loads for a second, stops again so I can acknowledge I have no Flash plugin; loads for a second, stops again
During the next half-day, well over a hundred popups demanding I acknowledge I had, in fact, no Flash plugin. I'm not going anywhere special here. Regular news and weather sites, basically.
Call me crazy, but if Apple or Microsoft intruded in the average user's browsing experience with (I'm not exadgerating here) more than 200 insistent demands that I download their software while trying to view 10 web sites, I think the entire online world would be pissed. It is, in fact, possible to browse the internet without QuickTime or Windows Media Player plugins installed, and at worst, you get a few funny icons in your browser page windows.
Flash? A constant, insistent, whining drone. You literally have pages that pop up in front of the page you are viewing to demand you do something about this serious failure to install our plugins. It's amazing how virtually no page on the internet can survive without the Flash Plugin.
Except, if I managed to click the popups by the hundred, the pages loaded just fine, thank you. The occasional image (video start screen) was blank. And I mean occasional; most still displayed.
So, without Flash; about 80% of my browsing experience consisted of acknowledging I had no Flash Plugin. Nice.
No wonder it works on 99% of browsers. Without it, you don't make it out of the driveway.
For me, they save perfectly and always save as a complete file ( I never grab it from the cache; that's the wrong way to do the job). Like I said: 100% success rate, and I have a relatively slow connection.
Try grabbing it from the server thats sending it to the web page in the first place, and waiting until it's done before you save. The only OS or Browser-specific trick is finding that particular url, but it can be done on any system quickly and easily.
I don't trust the download links. If you are saving from the server that sends the stream to the web page in the first place, then you will see the url for the video file they embed in the player is not the same as the url for the download link. Typically it's a different file (quality, etc), and that's if the video is actually available in the first place.
Often it's a portal to another site, whether it's ad strategy, link fraud, or downloading malware. I've learned that you don't use the provided download links. Waste of time.
Online Video is a cesspool of hell, and Flash is part of the cesspool like everyone else. Currently there is a serious vulnerability in the Flash Browser Plugin on all OS's. They are no better nor worse than anyone else; although they are very restrictive as to how content creators can format the video, which makes for a more universal experience for the user. For that you get mediocre video quality and often downright poor audio quality.
I don't really see the value of "Youtube-style video embedding." What's it good for?
Flash Video files are the easiest to pull from a website; I've yet to find an embedded Flash Video file I could not save to disk. I can't say that for QuickTime; a few have eluded me. As for Windows Media, they are by far the most difficult to save to disk; I can't say I've been 100% successful on those.
Got some Flash content you think is safe? Post the url; I'll email the whole thing to you as a self-contained movie file. Guaranteed.
Give me five minutes; Flash is slower to stream than QT or WMV.
Let me just say right off the bat that I do not have any special information regarding the pricing of Nintendo products. What I do have is years of experience as an owner of a reasonably successful electronics reseller. We didn't sell consoles or games, but the industry is not so different that there is going to be that much difference. I won't offer anything in the way of secrets or inside information, so you will have to read between the lines, but broadly speaking some or all of this is going to apply. Guaranteed.
Which means I'm going to accept, without any further comment, his assertion that he "pays $246" for a Nintendo Wii console that he is supposed to sell at $249.95. I would not be the least bit surprised that he has a piece of paper somewhere that says so. And then I'm going to say that when he says he pays $246 for a console, you should not interpret that as meaning it costs him $246 for a console. If it does, he has no business being in the industry he's in.
He may be factoring in the cost of financing his buying from his wholesaler (or a company specializing in this field), but if all his inventory is off the floor plan then generally speaking he is not really making money and should get out. This is where you don't have the necessary financing so you use the inventory itself as collateral, and it's expensive financing; akin to a credit card rate for consumers compared to a bank loan rate.
Typically there is something associated with the floor plan he makes very decent profit on but he needs certain items around to get you to buy the other items, but whatever. I hope I don't have to say out loud what a game reseller would possibly have around that makes lots of profit when the consoles don't.
If he is financing his entire inventory this way he is in bigger trouble than slim console margins. Properly done, it's fine. You get $249.99 the very morning the truck drops off the items, and pay $246 some time in the near future. The $4 is yours at zero cost and zero outlay. That is profit any way you look at it. It limited by supply, but it's still profit.
The alternative is to use your own money (probably financed, but at a much, much lower rate) and seek to reduce your costs to the maximum. This is the better way to make money but your operation has to have the cash flow to do it.
In that case, the invoice price does not include any discounts he had damn well be taking advantage of if he plans to stay in business. One example: shipping discounts. These are based on a variety of factors and can vary from free shipping to a cash allowance that comes off that $246. Another: early payment discounts. Again, they vary, but if he is not paying his invoice quickly and getting the early payment discount then he should be doing something else. They vary widely, but one real-world example is take 10% off the invoice price if your payment is received within 5 days after delivery to you; others may not be so generous but they still give you something. There are volume discounts, there are deals you get at trade shows for your commitment to buy in the near future, there are cozy relationships with your supplier who may be selling you other things, which may be where the discount applies that otherwise would not had he not bought the consoles, and so on, but these are just the mundane details.
Note that if you are on the floor plan, the guy you pay the high interest rate to is the guy taking advantage of all these discounts, because he owns your inventory. A savvy reader will figure out how likely it is that this type of lender is going to pay $246 for a console that he sells for $246. Sure, that interest income is nice, but they are all about the money and don't leave any on the table if they can avoid it.
I'm not suggesting these exact opportunities exist with this exact transaction or line of business, but I am suggesting that the impossible is, well, impossible. So if the story about his cost versus his sale price is too tough to be believed, it probably