Sounds like you believe the author. Never do that. I didn't say they had evidence to convince a jury, you just made that part up. Not me, not the police. I am not judging how 'compelling' the know information is since I don't know what it is. You can assume as you like.
I don't believe the hype or the pessimism. I'll patiently wait for proven technology to roll out. From years of driving I've learned one thing, that is some crazy unbelievable shit happens out there. Having algorithms that deal with it all is a long road (pun intended). Sometimes its probably better to have automatic reaction and not the element of surprise, other times it might not be so good to have an algorithm that treats a situation its never seen before as one it has.
The biggest challenge to autonomous vehicle control is going to be interaction with human controlled vehicles. Just dropping my kids at school every morning, I get in a situation where there is a line of cars, and people will stop to let cars enter from side roads, but only when it makes sense. And then there is the traffic cops (tow of them) that direct traffic and look in your eyes to make sure you see them as they direct you. That stuff is simple for humans to handle, but I can imagine quite a challenge for automated systems.
That is a perfectly good point regarding the problematic nature of the pursuit, and I don't necessarily disagree, but it is not relevant in legal terms regarding sufficient evidence.
Child porn has been aggressively prosecuted long before online trafficking and encryption became and issue. But hey, never miss a chance to deflect. There is a battle over encryption, but that does not mean everything it touches becomes ONLY about the encryption.
But it was more than just an accusation. The way I read it, they were monitoring a known child porn site online and seeing who was accessing it. They traced one of the accesses to this guy. They talked to people and his sister confirmed she'd seen child porn. They then seized his computer and forensically analyzed it.
Now, what we don't know is what that analysis found. They 'may' have seen that those disks were used at the same time as the accessed the child porn site, and 'may' had other evidence on his computer that showed he likely downloaded. If so, that would all be pretty compelling evidence as a whole.
There is other evidence from the investigation which started from his on-line activity. That, combined with testimony from a witness, combined with a forensic analysis of the use of the computer and disks seems pretty convincing, albeit circumstantial aside from the testimony. There certainly is evidence. I don't think they can hold this guy forever on that evidence, but probably for a good long while.
I like my headphone jacks simple and robust, thanks.
Exactly. Adding significant wear to the usb port only makes the eventual breakdown more problematic. At least I can charge a phone with a poor connection if I set it down and had the cord in the 'just right' position. Once my headphone connection starts going bad, its a bigger problem.
And then there is all those products out there that will suddenly be incompatible.
So, if I said KwH, then you'd have agreed that they are 400% efficient?
If not, then you are just lying to come up with more non sequiturs to hide the fact that you now realize you are 400% wrong.
No, because I completely explained, using kilowat-hours, the reasons why. I did it multiple times, but you simply don't get it.
And, btw, for someone who gets on my case for capitalizing the unit improperly, I see you are not so consistent in that regard either. Welcome to the club.
Yes, a watt is defined in terms of joules per second, so unless you multiply by time you have no actual energy expended. Its simple. You confuse capacity (kW) with actual energy (kWH, BTU, etc). The documentation is correct, your use of the information on it is not.
The difference is, and I tried to explain it already, that in the electrical system you cited as an example, electrical energy is being converted to heat energy, and although you should use kW-hours and not kW, yes that would be 100%.
In the heat pump case you cited, electrical energy is used to move heat. We don't know the efficiency because we don't know how much heat energy was put into the system. If the efficiency was 100%, then the movement of "4 kW" (again, wrong unit but wtf) of heat energy would be the maximum theoretically possible with no losses. That is, 100% of the electrical energy was converted into movement of heat energy. Here, no electricity is converted to heat energy. In reality, some of the electrical energy will convert to heat due to the compressor and compression process. If all of that goes into the house, then it still could be 100% efficient and add to the heat energy moved from outside.
If you ignore the heat energy put into the system from outside, it appears you are creating heat with the electrical energy. That is not the case, therefore you can't talk about efficiency in those terms.
I spelled it out as clearly as I could, you still don't get it and even ignore cited statements which clarify my point. I know the concepts are hard to digest, so I'll just let you go off thinking you've got it all figured out, I'm tired of wasting time. Efficiency is max at 100%, anything else is not true efficiency but and indirect reflection of it. You can describe such any way you please, I really don't care.
BTW, Kelvin*Watts is not a unit. It is two units multiplied. There is no such standalone engineering unit, and as such nobody with an engineering background would assume that KW, kw, Kw or kW, in the context of our conversation, means anything but kilowatt. I'm sure I made other typo errors, frankly you are not worth my time to proofread.
We canadians get half the content. There is no middle ground, we should be paying half the money US customers are paying for what is half the content.
And what if half the cost is not due to content, and if the content available is of higher cost than that not available? The infrastructure osct per customer, and customer acquisition cost is likely a lot higher outside the US, for example. NF original content costs more than a lot of other content. Maybe some content owners charge extra for adding Canada.
Its a lot easier for NF to keep one price structure rather than divide amongst areas. That would only increase the price across the board. Its best to decide if you want to pay for what is available or not, and quit worrying about what drives differences in other markets. I think NF is quite a deal even for just the small portion of content I watch.
The issue was not with what they are charging. You certainly CAN blame them for charging more than you are willing to pay, but that has nothing to do with them not being able to show the content to you legally.
My take is that if the copyright holders want some money, they should play ball with Netflix. Otherwise they are very likely to get nothing at all.
Good thought. Maybe, if and when NF gets the upper hand, that might become the case. For now NF needs the content and they are going to agree to terms to get content and keep it out of the hands of Amazon or other competitors. Of course, if NF does get to that point, things may look a lot different overall.
Don't blame Netflix, they are just complying with the law and contractual requirements of the content owners. Netflix would happily supply everything to Canadians if they were allowed to. Making NF the culprit just makes it easier for the real issues to stay in hiding.. the content owners thank those that blame NF.
Same applies to those who interpret polls, like the author of the article, and all those that assumed the author knew anything about polls. The poll clearly shows capitalism is the most popular system. The poll does not show who rejects what. If say I prefer apples over pears and oranges, that does not mean I reject oranges.
Using the approach of the author, the poll shows over 60% of millennials reject socialism.
Speaking of trust, we should not trust headlines. The polls shows capitalism is the preferred system among millennials. Using the twisted approach of the author, the poll shows that 65% of millennials reject socialism.
Slashdot Mirror
Sounds like you believe the author. Never do that. I didn't say they had evidence to convince a jury, you just made that part up. Not me, not the police. I am not judging how 'compelling' the know information is since I don't know what it is. You can assume as you like.
I don't believe the hype or the pessimism. I'll patiently wait for proven technology to roll out. From years of driving I've learned one thing, that is some crazy unbelievable shit happens out there. Having algorithms that deal with it all is a long road (pun intended). Sometimes its probably better to have automatic reaction and not the element of surprise, other times it might not be so good to have an algorithm that treats a situation its never seen before as one it has.
The biggest challenge to autonomous vehicle control is going to be interaction with human controlled vehicles. Just dropping my kids at school every morning, I get in a situation where there is a line of cars, and people will stop to let cars enter from side roads, but only when it makes sense. And then there is the traffic cops (tow of them) that direct traffic and look in your eyes to make sure you see them as they direct you. That stuff is simple for humans to handle, but I can imagine quite a challenge for automated systems.
There are a lot of Macbook owners that only use it for browsing and email. But it was cool and thin, so they wanted it.
That is a perfectly good point regarding the problematic nature of the pursuit, and I don't necessarily disagree, but it is not relevant in legal terms regarding sufficient evidence.
Yes, if the actual files are on the hard drive, they are the core evidence.
Child porn has been aggressively prosecuted long before online trafficking and encryption became and issue. But hey, never miss a chance to deflect. There is a battle over encryption, but that does not mean everything it touches becomes ONLY about the encryption.
But it was more than just an accusation. The way I read it, they were monitoring a known child porn site online and seeing who was accessing it. They traced one of the accesses to this guy. They talked to people and his sister confirmed she'd seen child porn. They then seized his computer and forensically analyzed it.
Now, what we don't know is what that analysis found. They 'may' have seen that those disks were used at the same time as the accessed the child porn site, and 'may' had other evidence on his computer that showed he likely downloaded. If so, that would all be pretty compelling evidence as a whole.
There is other evidence from the investigation which started from his on-line activity. That, combined with testimony from a witness, combined with a forensic analysis of the use of the computer and disks seems pretty convincing, albeit circumstantial aside from the testimony. There certainly is evidence. I don't think they can hold this guy forever on that evidence, but probably for a good long while.
I like my headphone jacks simple and robust, thanks.
Exactly. Adding significant wear to the usb port only makes the eventual breakdown more problematic. At least I can charge a phone with a poor connection if I set it down and had the cord in the 'just right' position. Once my headphone connection starts going bad, its a bigger problem.
And then there is all those products out there that will suddenly be incompatible.
So, if I said KwH, then you'd have agreed that they are 400% efficient? If not, then you are just lying to come up with more non sequiturs to hide the fact that you now realize you are 400% wrong.
No, because I completely explained, using kilowat-hours, the reasons why. I did it multiple times, but you simply don't get it. And, btw, for someone who gets on my case for capitalizing the unit improperly, I see you are not so consistent in that regard either. Welcome to the club.
Yes, a watt is defined in terms of joules per second, so unless you multiply by time you have no actual energy expended. Its simple. You confuse capacity (kW) with actual energy (kWH, BTU, etc). The documentation is correct, your use of the information on it is not.
The difference is, and I tried to explain it already, that in the electrical system you cited as an example, electrical energy is being converted to heat energy, and although you should use kW-hours and not kW, yes that would be 100%.
In the heat pump case you cited, electrical energy is used to move heat. We don't know the efficiency because we don't know how much heat energy was put into the system. If the efficiency was 100%, then the movement of "4 kW" (again, wrong unit but wtf) of heat energy would be the maximum theoretically possible with no losses. That is, 100% of the electrical energy was converted into movement of heat energy. Here, no electricity is converted to heat energy. In reality, some of the electrical energy will convert to heat due to the compressor and compression process. If all of that goes into the house, then it still could be 100% efficient and add to the heat energy moved from outside.
If you ignore the heat energy put into the system from outside, it appears you are creating heat with the electrical energy. That is not the case, therefore you can't talk about efficiency in those terms.
How about just give riders a few free late shows, then start charging them.
My apologies, I was thinking of another event. Ignore previous statement.
Specifically, it was the control board in a crane. That controller not connected to anything else, it is a standalone locally controlled item.
I spelled it out as clearly as I could, you still don't get it and even ignore cited statements which clarify my point. I know the concepts are hard to digest, so I'll just let you go off thinking you've got it all figured out, I'm tired of wasting time. Efficiency is max at 100%, anything else is not true efficiency but and indirect reflection of it. You can describe such any way you please, I really don't care.
BTW, Kelvin*Watts is not a unit. It is two units multiplied. There is no such standalone engineering unit, and as such nobody with an engineering background would assume that KW, kw, Kw or kW, in the context of our conversation, means anything but kilowatt. I'm sure I made other typo errors, frankly you are not worth my time to proofread.
fullgandoo is right, you are wrong
We canadians get half the content. There is no middle ground, we should be paying half the money US customers are paying for what is half the content.
And what if half the cost is not due to content, and if the content available is of higher cost than that not available? The infrastructure osct per customer, and customer acquisition cost is likely a lot higher outside the US, for example. NF original content costs more than a lot of other content. Maybe some content owners charge extra for adding Canada.
Its a lot easier for NF to keep one price structure rather than divide amongst areas. That would only increase the price across the board. Its best to decide if you want to pay for what is available or not, and quit worrying about what drives differences in other markets. I think NF is quite a deal even for just the small portion of content I watch.
If you use Netflix, then you are also a player.
Red Dragon rhymes with Dead Wagon
The issue was not with what they are charging. You certainly CAN blame them for charging more than you are willing to pay, but that has nothing to do with them not being able to show the content to you legally.
My take is that if the copyright holders want some money, they should play ball with Netflix. Otherwise they are very likely to get nothing at all.
Good thought. Maybe, if and when NF gets the upper hand, that might become the case. For now NF needs the content and they are going to agree to terms to get content and keep it out of the hands of Amazon or other competitors. Of course, if NF does get to that point, things may look a lot different overall.
Don't blame Netflix, they are just complying with the law and contractual requirements of the content owners. Netflix would happily supply everything to Canadians if they were allowed to. Making NF the culprit just makes it easier for the real issues to stay in hiding.. the content owners thank those that blame NF.
Same applies to those who interpret polls, like the author of the article, and all those that assumed the author knew anything about polls. The poll clearly shows capitalism is the most popular system. The poll does not show who rejects what. If say I prefer apples over pears and oranges, that does not mean I reject oranges.
Using the approach of the author, the poll shows over 60% of millennials reject socialism.
The poll shows even more millennials (over 60%) reject socialism, if you use the logic of the author.
What the poll shows, clearly, is a that of all the choices Capitalism is the preferred one among millennials.
Speaking of trust, we should not trust headlines. The polls shows capitalism is the preferred system among millennials. Using the twisted approach of the author, the poll shows that 65% of millennials reject socialism.