You're not countering my point. You're just being an asshole. My examples weren't meant to be illustrative, not definitive. Also, that is a suppressor, not a silencer. There is no gun you can shoot that makes a 'phut' noise and won't draw the attention of everyone in a 20 meter radius.
Yeah, a lot of people have misconceptions, which is often why there are expert witnesses to clarify issues that aren't commonly in the general body of knowledge. However, that doesn't mean that any knowledge not gleaned from an expert witness is forbidden.
You're expected to go into the juror room with your existing body of knowledge, plus the instructions, plus the evidence and present a verdict. The judge didn't clarify stuff because they're not allowed to unilaterally change the wording on the instructions, which have been agreed on by multiple parties. If you and or your jury decided that 'can't consider anything other than the evidence' as meaning a particular thing, well that's up to you and that jury.
From http://www.osbar.org/public/jurorhandbook.htm:
If you have special knowledge or information about any of the facts of a particular case, you should not communicate that information to other jurors. In deciding a case jurors are expected to bring to bear all the experience, common sense and common knowledge they possess; but they are not to rely on any private source of information
Emphasis mine
That means you can't use the fact that you happen know the defendant is left handed, or that the company he works for is releasing a new thing next week (because you work for the company too). On the other hand, if you know that guns can't be fired underwater, or that silencers as presented in movies don't actually exist, and it's pertinent to the case, you can fucking well say so. You just can't look stuff up that you don't already know.
If he held a patent and it didn't come up in jury selection, well that's the fault of the lawyers. If it did come up in jury selection and he lied, I'd assume that would have a heavy impact on appeals, maybe even void the verdict. He'd probably get some jail time too. If it did come up in jury selection and he told the truth, it's up to the judge to decide if it constitutes bias (and they'll often base that off of asking the person if they feel they'd be biased) and it's up to the lawyers to decide if they want to use one of their limited number of juror exceptions.
Yes, I have served on a jury. The idea that you can only consider the evidence presented doesn't mean you have to operate in a vacuum. If someone's alibi hinged on their ability to fly like superman and the opposing side didn't present any evidence one way or another, are you unable to use your knowledge that people can't fly unassisted when deciding? No, that would be stupid. Jurors are assumed to have a basic level of understanding of the world in order to do their jobs, and further, the lawyers on both sides have ample opportunity to reject people on the basis of bias (caused by too much specific knowledge in a given domain, or for no stated reason at all).
You're not allowed to ferret out evidence related to the case at hand. That does not mean you can't use your own existing knowledge of a given domain. If a trial hinges on whether the earth is flat or round, but no evidence is presented at the trial showing one way or another, you can still use your knowledge that the earth is round. It's possible people will use domain 'knowledge' that is incorrect, the hope is that at least the prevailing knowledge on the topic is correct. If that's not the case, or you have a forceful personality pushing bad ideas, well, that's just a failing to jury trials.
So is the Epig 4G Sprint variant of the Galaxy S. I'd suggest Sprint made the changes to the form factor and placement of items because of concern over similarities to the iPhone, except that the Spring Galaxy S II variant doesn't have any of the changes that were on the Epig 4G. It's practically a reference model Galaxy S II.
One of my favorite authors, and I'm surprised he's not more widely read, although I feel his more recent work has gone a little off the rails.
However, I wouldn't really call him 'under-appreciated'. His works tend to get included in a lot of collections, even if he doesn't have the notoriety of an Asimov, Heinlein, or Herbert.
They're not going to give out the source code AND it's not illegal for them not to do so. The GPL will either fall under copyright law, or general contract law, depending on whether you consider it to fall under Article I, Section 8, Clause 8 of the constitution or not. Either way, both sets of laws are superseded by national security concerns, which certainly would cover a cyberweapon developed by the US government. I would no more expect the US to release the details of this software than I would expect then to release all the details of a nuclear weapon if for some reason because the GPL somehow required it.
6.25% APR is a lot better than a lot of poor people can get. Yes, Microsoft charges extra for the service of offering a lower upfront cost and assuming the risk associated with hoping people don't break the 2 year commitment (pursuing ETF fees from people who break the contract isn't free, and its by no means anywhere near 100% effective). There's nothing to see here.
The 'kooky' energy breakthroughs I'm talking about are the ones that are pushed by all the whack-job websites out there.
'Cold fusion', taken as 'fusion which can occur in an environment that is macroscopically not operating at fusion temperatures' is not an and of itself impossible. Bubble fusion is a hypothetical mechanism. Muon-catalyzed fusion is a well established mechanism which, were it not for the half life of muons and their tendency to be consumed alpha particles (by byproducts of fusion reactions), would be a cheap source of power today.
1) Rossi is working with Sergio Focardi, who is a physicist. 2) Just because there have been hoaxes in the field of energy production before does not mean every possible breakthrough is also a hoax.
I have lots of doubts and am impatient to see this either disproved or validated. The fact remains, if there every is an energy breakthrough like the one being described here it will inevitably look just like this. There will be tons of rational skeptical people nay-saying it because that's the safe bet. There will be tons of kooks and conspiracy nuts supporting it as validation of what they've believed all along (which it isn't necessarily). Any real energy breakthrough will always end up looking crazy because initially it's going to have all the same responses and symptoms of all the prior scams and kooks.
If you look at all the secrecy around the customer, you can say it's because it's all a scam. But you can equally say that any real customer doesn't want to reveal themselves publicly before the tech is validated precisely because of the fringe science air this all carries.
Yeah, 'Cold Fusion' and LENR are largely synonymous, but the former term has been tainted by bad press over the last 20 years. In point of fact my submission used the term LENR in place of Cold Fusion, but apparently the editors felt it wasn't mass market enough. And to be fair, there have been some quotes by Rossi saying it's not actually fusion, but some sort of weak field interaction, but since it supposedly consumes nickel and produces coppoer, not calling it fusion seems more like marketing.
The real tipoff that this is fake is that they haven't been bought out by one of the big energy producers.
Maybe he doesn't want to sell to an existing energy producer, because it means the difference between making a few billion, and probably seeing your work buried, vs building a new energy industry and ending up controlling a sizable percentage of the wealth & political power in the world. I mean who would you rather be, the heir to some multi-billion dollar business fortune, or someone who has an active say in the destiny of the whole world.
Electrolysis is a chemical reaction, and as such will be orders of magnitude less expensive in terms of energy than any nuclear reaction. While hydrogen can't really be used as a fuel efficiently since its inefficient to produce if you're using electricity produced by chemical reactions like fossil fuels, if your energy source is nuclear and the reaction requires hydrogen, then its perfectly reasonable to use some of the energy output to generate hydrogen and still have plenty of surplus.
A nuclear reaction will always be orders of magnitude greater than a chemical reaction.
This device lacks a camera and a microphone. As far as I know it still has access to an app store, so if you want to create on it you can use any app that allows you to do so (that doesn't require a camera or a microphone). If you desperately want to create photo based or audio based content there are plenty of cheap options to do so.
If we had oils rigs that were fully automated, I'd say, sure, go fully unmanned for space exploration / exploitation. But we can't. There are too many things that a person can do that can't be automated tele-operated in any reasonable way. As long as that's true we won't be able to do real exploitation of the resources available beyond the earth (energy, raw materials, etc) without the ability to have humans in space.
Well, for one thing, SRB's don't have an off switch or a throttle. Once ignited your only options are 'let it burn until it runs out of fuel' and 'detonate the entire rocket at once (which is what happened when the SRB's on the Challenger went out of control after the launch stack fell apart).
The Shuttle SRB's in particular are built in segments which are connected by O-Rings, and that design vulnerability is part of the cause of the Challenger disaster, although this particular failing is less about SRB's in general than political ass-hattery.
Its not like Toshiba is some po-dunk laptop maker. They took the time to certify against the NB100 and NB200 series, so it doesn't seem unreasonable to think that the NB305 might work. And in general, if your response is 'get different hardware' then you're already doing something wrong IMO.
I tried installing Ubuntu 10.10 on my NB305. Worst. OS. Ever.
* Would not boot properly unless I held a key down.
* Would never wake from sleep
* Wifi would drop connection and require a restart to restore it
A couple of those I was able to resolve after some serious research (something a neophyte would never have been able to do), but the whole experience just convinced me that Ubuntu isn't ready for mobile hardware unless they put some serious effort into compatibility testing.
Slashdot Mirror
FTFY.
Yeah, a lot of people have misconceptions, which is often why there are expert witnesses to clarify issues that aren't commonly in the general body of knowledge. However, that doesn't mean that any knowledge not gleaned from an expert witness is forbidden.
If you have special knowledge or information about any of the facts of a particular case , you should not communicate that information to other jurors. In deciding a case jurors are expected to bring to bear all the experience, common sense and common knowledge they possess; but they are not to rely on any private source of information
Emphasis mine
That means you can't use the fact that you happen know the defendant is left handed, or that the company he works for is releasing a new thing next week (because you work for the company too). On the other hand, if you know that guns can't be fired underwater, or that silencers as presented in movies don't actually exist, and it's pertinent to the case, you can fucking well say so. You just can't look stuff up that you don't already know.
If he held a patent and it didn't come up in jury selection, well that's the fault of the lawyers. If it did come up in jury selection and he lied, I'd assume that would have a heavy impact on appeals, maybe even void the verdict. He'd probably get some jail time too. If it did come up in jury selection and he told the truth, it's up to the judge to decide if it constitutes bias (and they'll often base that off of asking the person if they feel they'd be biased) and it's up to the lawyers to decide if they want to use one of their limited number of juror exceptions.
Yes, I have served on a jury. The idea that you can only consider the evidence presented doesn't mean you have to operate in a vacuum. If someone's alibi hinged on their ability to fly like superman and the opposing side didn't present any evidence one way or another, are you unable to use your knowledge that people can't fly unassisted when deciding? No, that would be stupid. Jurors are assumed to have a basic level of understanding of the world in order to do their jobs, and further, the lawyers on both sides have ample opportunity to reject people on the basis of bias (caused by too much specific knowledge in a given domain, or for no stated reason at all).
You're not allowed to ferret out evidence related to the case at hand. That does not mean you can't use your own existing knowledge of a given domain. If a trial hinges on whether the earth is flat or round, but no evidence is presented at the trial showing one way or another, you can still use your knowledge that the earth is round. It's possible people will use domain 'knowledge' that is incorrect, the hope is that at least the prevailing knowledge on the topic is correct. If that's not the case, or you have a forceful personality pushing bad ideas, well, that's just a failing to jury trials.
So is the Epig 4G Sprint variant of the Galaxy S. I'd suggest Sprint made the changes to the form factor and placement of items because of concern over similarities to the iPhone, except that the Spring Galaxy S II variant doesn't have any of the changes that were on the Epig 4G. It's practically a reference model Galaxy S II.
One of my favorite authors, and I'm surprised he's not more widely read, although I feel his more recent work has gone a little off the rails. However, I wouldn't really call him 'under-appreciated'. His works tend to get included in a lot of collections, even if he doesn't have the notoriety of an Asimov, Heinlein, or Herbert.
They're not going to give out the source code AND it's not illegal for them not to do so. The GPL will either fall under copyright law, or general contract law, depending on whether you consider it to fall under Article I, Section 8, Clause 8 of the constitution or not. Either way, both sets of laws are superseded by national security concerns, which certainly would cover a cyberweapon developed by the US government. I would no more expect the US to release the details of this software than I would expect then to release all the details of a nuclear weapon if for some reason because the GPL somehow required it.
6.25% APR is a lot better than a lot of poor people can get. Yes, Microsoft charges extra for the service of offering a lower upfront cost and assuming the risk associated with hoping people don't break the 2 year commitment (pursuing ETF fees from people who break the contract isn't free, and its by no means anywhere near 100% effective). There's nothing to see here.
Because foot powered pumps wouldn't be wheelchair accessible. Duh!
'Cold fusion', taken as 'fusion which can occur in an environment that is macroscopically not operating at fusion temperatures' is not an and of itself impossible. Bubble fusion is a hypothetical mechanism. Muon-catalyzed fusion is a well established mechanism which, were it not for the half life of muons and their tendency to be consumed alpha particles (by byproducts of fusion reactions), would be a cheap source of power today.
1) Rossi is working with Sergio Focardi, who is a physicist. 2) Just because there have been hoaxes in the field of energy production before does not mean every possible breakthrough is also a hoax.
I have lots of doubts and am impatient to see this either disproved or validated. The fact remains, if there every is an energy breakthrough like the one being described here it will inevitably look just like this. There will be tons of rational skeptical people nay-saying it because that's the safe bet. There will be tons of kooks and conspiracy nuts supporting it as validation of what they've believed all along (which it isn't necessarily). Any real energy breakthrough will always end up looking crazy because initially it's going to have all the same responses and symptoms of all the prior scams and kooks.
If you look at all the secrecy around the customer, you can say it's because it's all a scam. But you can equally say that any real customer doesn't want to reveal themselves publicly before the tech is validated precisely because of the fringe science air this all carries.
Yeah, 'Cold Fusion' and LENR are largely synonymous, but the former term has been tainted by bad press over the last 20 years. In point of fact my submission used the term LENR in place of Cold Fusion, but apparently the editors felt it wasn't mass market enough. And to be fair, there have been some quotes by Rossi saying it's not actually fusion, but some sort of weak field interaction, but since it supposedly consumes nickel and produces coppoer, not calling it fusion seems more like marketing.
The real tipoff that this is fake is that they haven't been bought out by one of the big energy producers.
Maybe he doesn't want to sell to an existing energy producer, because it means the difference between making a few billion, and probably seeing your work buried, vs building a new energy industry and ending up controlling a sizable percentage of the wealth & political power in the world. I mean who would you rather be, the heir to some multi-billion dollar business fortune, or someone who has an active say in the destiny of the whole world.
Electrolysis is a chemical reaction, and as such will be orders of magnitude less expensive in terms of energy than any nuclear reaction. While hydrogen can't really be used as a fuel efficiently since its inefficient to produce if you're using electricity produced by chemical reactions like fossil fuels, if your energy source is nuclear and the reaction requires hydrogen, then its perfectly reasonable to use some of the energy output to generate hydrogen and still have plenty of surplus. A nuclear reaction will always be orders of magnitude greater than a chemical reaction.
As far as I know, hydrogen can be produced pretty simply using water and electricity.
Without GPS or location services, Google Maps loses a lot of its luster. You can still use Yelp.
There are plenty of epub readers on the Amazon app store.
I'll tell you on Nov 16.
This device lacks a camera and a microphone. As far as I know it still has access to an app store, so if you want to create on it you can use any app that allows you to do so (that doesn't require a camera or a microphone). If you desperately want to create photo based or audio based content there are plenty of cheap options to do so.
If we had oils rigs that were fully automated, I'd say, sure, go fully unmanned for space exploration / exploitation. But we can't. There are too many things that a person can do that can't be automated tele-operated in any reasonable way. As long as that's true we won't be able to do real exploitation of the resources available beyond the earth (energy, raw materials, etc) without the ability to have humans in space.
Well, for one thing, SRB's don't have an off switch or a throttle. Once ignited your only options are 'let it burn until it runs out of fuel' and 'detonate the entire rocket at once (which is what happened when the SRB's on the Challenger went out of control after the launch stack fell apart).
The Shuttle SRB's in particular are built in segments which are connected by O-Rings, and that design vulnerability is part of the cause of the Challenger disaster, although this particular failing is less about SRB's in general than political ass-hattery.
Its not like Toshiba is some po-dunk laptop maker. They took the time to certify against the NB100 and NB200 series, so it doesn't seem unreasonable to think that the NB305 might work. And in general, if your response is 'get different hardware' then you're already doing something wrong IMO.
I tried installing Ubuntu 10.10 on my NB305. Worst. OS. Ever. * Would not boot properly unless I held a key down. * Would never wake from sleep * Wifi would drop connection and require a restart to restore it A couple of those I was able to resolve after some serious research (something a neophyte would never have been able to do), but the whole experience just convinced me that Ubuntu isn't ready for mobile hardware unless they put some serious effort into compatibility testing.