6) Try to sell to international TV networks 7) Notice they're not buying as much as you'd like to see because their target audience appears to be downloading the thing anyway 8) Try to sell the DVDs 9) Notice they're not selling as well as you'd like to see because the target audience appears to be downloading the thing anyway 10) Still profit. But not as much as you potentially could at this point. 11) Apply RIAA/MPAA math as applicable and complain about the hand that fed you in 'the early days'
In this case, it's a blade that cuts both ways.
It's all good and well when the copyright owner -allows- it. It's another when they don't.
Then there's platform games.. Soldat is 2D. Best Friends is 3D. Totally different gameplay, but still just 1 category right ?
Then there's board games.. chess, checkers, go, whatever.
Adventure games (2D, text).
WEIRD games. That's you, Katamari Damacy. Yes, it's an original game. Yes, it's fun. For about 15 minutes.
Then there's the whole plethora of 'original' games no playstation/etc. Play the game by hitting a set of bongos ?? Or drawing crude Pac Man-shaped shapes on your Nintendo DS and watch it 'come alive' ?
There's seriously plenty of different/interesting games besides FPS.
The reason there's so many FPS games is because: 1. They're relatively cheap to make (hence the plethora of mods out there) 2. A lot of people -like- these kinds of games.
There's also enough variation between FPS games as well. Doom, half-life, wolfenstein, breed, etc. are all pretty much the same.. run/shoot. But there's also games which require more strategy/teamwork, and yet others which require you to be stealthy.
Anyway.. maybe you're just not looking hard enough:)
I'm curious... would 'C' be seen as a Common Carrier in this case, much like ISPs ?
If not... could they be 'liable' for any of the more shady/outright illicit material passing through them from B to A as they've willingly and knowingly become part of this Rodi thing ?
( Not to be confused with thousands of hacked boxes through which spam/viruses/etc. get sent, as I doubt most owners of those boxes aren't willingly and knowingly part of a spam/botnet )
that isn't warez, mp3, or sex-based, #chatzone, it would at least be nice if you could acknowledge the existance of certain botnets, their owners, etc. That and give -us- some level of information on what -we- can do against them.
This isn't directly referring to those botnets used for IP DDoS'ing - UnderNET users typically have very little notice of them, I'm sorry that the UnderNET servers obviously do by sheer connection/disconnection power - but more to those used to DDoS channels and users by crapflooding/messaging/ctcp'ing/etc.
I'm talking about botnets like those under control by AlkkatraZ (username Almighty1 - connects using a plethora of vhosts). Some of which can be dealt with by a simple ban due to their structure, others could be dealt with if there was such a thing as a regex ban and banning capabilities on the username part - but alas. But all in all, they could most easily be dealt with by crippling them. For example: flagging all of these bots as not being able to receive messages.
At best, the botnet operator will wonder why the frick his bots are no longer responding. At semi-worst, there's somebody real behind one of those infected machines as well and they'll wonder why their friends are no longer messaging them. At worst, the botnet operator figures it out and goes on a revenge-tour and DDoS's UnderNET servers.
Oh, and for what it's worth, yes we do contact the ISPs behind the infected machines, and although response rate isn't 100%, it's not zero either. We think it's worth the try - why wouldn't you ?
Please note that 'you' here isn't directed at you personally, but at IRCopers and Admins of UnderNET. I just think it's lame that obviously you have automated tools to detect them, but then you (apparently, from your own post) do diddly-squat about them.
Just my 2 cents. For what it's worth, UnderNET still kicks EF/DAL/IRCnet ass:P
('you' is used freely here, not necessarily the parent poster)
So, quite honestly, if all the damages you create are $5 per month's worth of downloading you may have done, and you would just laugh at those penalties... Then why wouldn't you just -use- that $5/month service and download legitimately?
I know.. selection/etc. But then that would imply that your download of a track that such services -don't- offer may still equal the cost of the single/maxi/full album CD. Multiply that by the number of tracks you would have downloaded and that those services don't offer.
Seems to me - and it has been said before - that most people just want music for free, period.
It would also be nice that when you've got a confirmation that person X will provide a quote, that they will actually do so. ( Come on, people, it takes all of 5 minutes.. if you can't come up with a quote in 5 minutes, then maybe you shouldn't have agreed to providing one )
Rather than having to e-mail and call and just get "oh yeah.. will do that later" and end up having to pull a rather common thing when it comes to quotes: Making up your own quote, sending that to Person X just for their approval, and using that. Yep, that's right, they never said what was written, but they agree with it, so hey.
I wonder how much of the reporter's apparently 'unfounded' quotes may have been of this particular type
SVG tiny = mobile phones SVG basic = PDAs SVG = personal computers
And if you'd checked this page: http://www.w3.org/TR/SVGMobile/#sec-eleind, which is Google hit #1 for 'svg tiny', you would see the differences between SVG tiny and SVG basic in terms of supported elements, styles (further down), etc. In addition, anywhere where SVG basic at least reads "n/a", that's a feature that should be in SVG full.
How many people do you know of that carry a dedicated camera with them at all time ? Not talking about 'keep it in the glove box', as that requires a car. I can't drive my car up to my desk or into a store;)
Now compare that to how many people you know of that carry a cellular phone with them at all time.
If you're on the road / down-town / whatever and you see something and would like to take a picture of it, you could.. A. Go home, get camera, return, take picture B. Whip out the camera phone, take picture, carry on
If your boss calls you up telling you that he would like to see you on saturday at 7pm for a meeting, you could... A. Remember it, program it into your PDA when you get home B. Write it down on a piece of paper, program it into your PDA when you get home C. Whip out your phone and toss it into the calendar app
I have no argument for the MP3 player as I have none:) However, if you're a music lover, then why would you run around with a yet-another-device if your phone can play back MP3s just as good as your run-of-the-mill mp3 player ? Sure, there's interface (hello iPod), but most people really don't use the interface that often. Point in case: iPod Shuffle
Back to your real life example... Say you're in the bathroom, you open a cupboard door, and notice the knob's a bit loose. You could... A. Walk into your toolshed / hobby area and fetch yourself a screwdriver, fasten the screw, return the screwdriver B. Whip out your swiss army knife and fasten the screw
Nobody's saying that these phones will replace DSLRs, a blackberry, an iPod, or your (semi-)professional craftsman tools. But if my phone had all the tools of my utility knife built-in, I just might find reason not to carry the utility knife around in my pants.
I had a long explanation here, but in short: well-said:)
All I'm saying is.. if you do find out, or reasonably should have been able to find out, that product X 'violates' your patent - and you don't do anything about it for N years (again, I suggest 3. That should be enough ?), then you waive the right to enforce the patent with regards to product X. If product Y comes along which also 'violates' it, you're still free to tell them to license or get the **** out of your market, as long as you do it within those N years of finding out / when you reasonably should have been able to find out.
As to what defines what 'reasonable' may be, that'd be up to a judge if it would come to that. Should be easier than detangling the mess MS/Forgent are presenting, though./nokarma
Some may claim it's not abuse... I suppose it's ot
Some claim it was a submarine patent... well no, it wasn't. (Look up the definition of a submarine patent first)
However... - Their patent was issued in October 1987 - Their patent went unenforced until July 2002
That's a 15 year gap. I know that unlike trademarks, patents need not be enforced. But that's a change I would gladly see made.
So somebody asked what we can do to avoid these things. Unfortunately, as long as patents exist, I don't think we can avoid them. What we -can- do is decide better how to deal with them. I'm not one for completely ignoring patents altogether - they have their good uses, even in software. But in cases such as these, I think that if a patent hasn't been enforced over a certain technology for over N years (I suggest 3), then I think the patent holder should be barred from making any claims to patent infringement. I'm sure there's plenty of loopholes and problems with this, but the basic principle would be - you still get to patent stuff - people still need to respect that patent. So if you make a product and your patent search results in a hit, you still have to license the patent (if applicable) - you still get to hold those who, somehow, missed your patent accountable for it within an N-year timeframe - those who somehow missed your patent, and you somehow miss their technology or the realization that it infringes on your patent, for > N years won't suddenly be met with a patent lawsuit -- which means that any invention that got wildly popular can't suddenly be milked for all its worth because a bunch of suits managed to twist patent interpretations enough to make it applicable to that invention -- small companies won't be sued out of existance just for missing a patent > N years ago
-----
As for another user's question... what are open (lossy compression) alternatives ? There's plenty of 'open' alternatives. Problem is that there's a patent of some form behind every single one that I'm aware of. The JPEG thing, JPEG2000, Wavelets, Gradient Tesselation, Fractal..
Finally.. I wonder what all this Forgent stuff will do, if anything, to the StuffIt guys; http://hardware.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/01/ 12/0725217&tid=198 As they use, at least partially, a different compression (to get even smaller files). If all this Forgent stuff doesn't apply to them, and Forgent gets to keep the patent business going, the Stuffit format may prove to be attractive to some companies as it would require minimal change in code/etc. (at least when compared to a completely different format)
As the article itself mentions, it's not really that big a deal. It is the white balance parameters as set on the camera when the image was shot that is encrypted. The RAW data isn't directly affected by this, and picking a white-balance preset or performing manual/auto whitebalacing on the RAW data gives you the same/similar/better results (that's partly the point of shooting RAW, no?)
What could be worse is if they encrypted the data as well. This is what SONY does on the F828 and V3, for example. However, both are supported by Photoshop's RAW support, so I take it they simply licensed or SONY gave them a thumbs up for supporting it. No idea why they encrypt it, though. Regardless.. that's what would have to happen with any future encrypted formats.. I doubt we've seen the last of them anyway.
If all else fails, get the dcraw utils ( http://www.cybercom.net/~dcoffin/dcraw/ ) and convert from one raw to another. That's where the SONY decryptor is also hosted.
Speaking of dcraw... has Adobe given the author credit yet ?
They're the third... maybe behind by leaps and bounds, but there you have it.
They have a Photoshop alternative of themselves, they have Paintshop Pro as the el-cheapo alternative, they've got Painter, they've got technical drawing, vector drawing, etc. etc. They even have Wordperfect (*chuckle*) - more importantly, the suite.
That said.. Adobe/Macromedia merger is still sort of scary.
Of course, the Autobahn is in Germany, is fairly orderly (compared to U.S. roads, yes), and is more of a 'go with the flow' thing as I mentioned above.
Those wouldn't really benefit from any such setup, though putting the threshold there at 30km/h+ over would be fine with me:)
I don't think anybody can (sanely) argue for abolishing speed limits altogether, though - imho:)
so.. 3 miles over, okay, I agree, would be silly, and cashcow-y, etc. etc.
But what if it was 50 seconds ? mile marker 100 = 0s mile marker 101 = 50s speed = 72miles/hour
Now we're going 12mph over. Certainly that -should- be ticketed, no ? ( except for those long-ass stretches in the U.S. where the basic motto is "go with the flow", and the flow typically goes 80 where it's a 65mph (nighttime) limit )
So the only reasonable argument to be made here is - what would the general populace consider a ticketable offense ? Or, rather, what would the general populace put up with ? (if some people had their say, there'd be no speed limits at all)
I'd certainly say that if the threshold were, say, 10mph+ over, then you've got nothing to whine about if you do get a ticket (short of hardware malfunction, it not being you who was driving the vehicle, all those arguments and then some)
It's modded Funny for obvious reasons, but I think it should be noted that this is in fact not a laptop; it is a notebook.
Then again, I don't know when I last saw an actual laptop. The terms laptop and notebook have been used as if they're synonyms for quite a while now.
The difference between the two should be obvious. One is designed for use truly 'on the go' - on your lap when riding the bus if need be. That'd be the laptop. A notebook, on the other hand, may be portable and easy to carry around - but is primarily intended to be used in a proper workspace - and thus on a table/desk/whathaveyou.. just not your lap.
Other differing factors are: - overall weight (you don't typically want 6lbs+ on your lap, or carry it around a lot) - overall size (notebook with giant display, too bulky) - balance (don't want something on your lap that tends to tip over to the left due to all the major electronics being on that side) - heat (heat should be dissipated and fanned out to the side, airflow intake should be coming from the other side, the back, or in the center/towards the back (so as not to get covered by one's thigh) - access ports, auxiliary button should be on the side (otherwise you have to set the computer aside when, for example, loading a DVD and the DVD bay inserts at the front. oops..
And probably a few more points I've forgotten since I took that ergonomics class.
Without pulling up the actual specs... 2.2m = 220cm 220cm / 1920pixels = 0.114583cm/pixel Or, in other terms, about 1.15mm/pixel
1.86m = 187cm 187 / 1080pixels = 0.173148cm/pixel Or, in other terms, about 1.73mm/pixel
Slightly non-square, I'd imagine if I'd pull up the actual specs of the display panel itself (not the entire casing) I'd get square, and smaller, pixels yet.
Slashdot Mirror
6) Try to sell to international TV networks
7) Notice they're not buying as much as you'd like to see because their target audience appears to be downloading the thing anyway
8) Try to sell the DVDs
9) Notice they're not selling as well as you'd like to see because the target audience appears to be downloading the thing anyway
10) Still profit. But not as much as you potentially could at this point.
11) Apply RIAA/MPAA math as applicable and complain about the hand that fed you in 'the early days'
In this case, it's a blade that cuts both ways.
It's all good and well when the copyright owner -allows- it. It's another when they don't.
six.. you forgot the FPS...
:
:)
Then there's platform games.. Soldat is 2D. Best Friends is 3D. Totally different gameplay, but still just 1 category right ?
Then there's board games.. chess, checkers, go, whatever.
Adventure games (2D, text).
WEIRD games. That's you, Katamari Damacy. Yes, it's an original game. Yes, it's fun. For about 15 minutes.
Then there's the whole plethora of 'original' games no playstation/etc. Play the game by hitting a set of bongos ?? Or drawing crude Pac Man-shaped shapes on your Nintendo DS and watch it 'come alive' ?
There's seriously plenty of different/interesting games besides FPS.
The reason there's so many FPS games is because
1. They're relatively cheap to make (hence the plethora of mods out there)
2. A lot of people -like- these kinds of games.
There's also enough variation between FPS games as well. Doom, half-life, wolfenstein, breed, etc. are all pretty much the same.. run/shoot. But there's also games which require more strategy/teamwork, and yet others which require you to be stealthy.
Anyway.. maybe you're just not looking hard enough
I'm curious... would 'C' be seen as a Common Carrier in this case, much like ISPs ?
If not... could they be 'liable' for any of the more shady/outright illicit material passing through them from B to A as they've willingly and knowingly become part of this Rodi thing ?
( Not to be confused with thousands of hacked boxes through which spam/viruses/etc. get sent, as I doubt most owners of those boxes aren't willingly and knowingly part of a spam/botnet )
that isn't warez, mp3, or sex-based, #chatzone, it would at least be nice if you could acknowledge the existance of certain botnets, their owners, etc. That and give -us- some level of information on what -we- can do against them.
:P
This isn't directly referring to those botnets used for IP DDoS'ing - UnderNET users typically have very little notice of them, I'm sorry that the UnderNET servers obviously do by sheer connection/disconnection power - but more to those used to DDoS channels and users by crapflooding/messaging/ctcp'ing/etc.
I'm talking about botnets like those under control by AlkkatraZ (username Almighty1 - connects using a plethora of vhosts). Some of which can be dealt with by a simple ban due to their structure, others could be dealt with if there was such a thing as a regex ban and banning capabilities on the username part - but alas.
But all in all, they could most easily be dealt with by crippling them. For example: flagging all of these bots as not being able to receive messages.
At best, the botnet operator will wonder why the frick his bots are no longer responding.
At semi-worst, there's somebody real behind one of those infected machines as well and they'll wonder why their friends are no longer messaging them.
At worst, the botnet operator figures it out and goes on a revenge-tour and DDoS's UnderNET servers.
Oh, and for what it's worth, yes we do contact the ISPs behind the infected machines, and although response rate isn't 100%, it's not zero either. We think it's worth the try - why wouldn't you ?
Please note that 'you' here isn't directed at you personally, but at IRCopers and Admins of UnderNET. I just think it's lame that obviously you have automated tools to detect them, but then you (apparently, from your own post) do diddly-squat about them.
Just my 2 cents. For what it's worth, UnderNET still kicks EF/DAL/IRCnet ass
...which melts at an even lower temperature
u id_metal/liquid_metal.html
See also:
http://www.scitoys.com/scitoys/scitoys/thermo/liq
( kudos to venkeroz on tweakers.net for that link in a post on this story 4 days ago )
('you' is used freely here, not necessarily the parent poster)
So, quite honestly, if all the damages you create are $5 per month's worth of downloading you may have done, and you would just laugh at those penalties...
Then why wouldn't you just -use- that $5/month service and download legitimately?
I know.. selection/etc. But then that would imply that your download of a track that such services -don't- offer may still equal the cost of the single/maxi/full album CD. Multiply that by the number of tracks you would have downloaded and that those services don't offer.
Seems to me - and it has been said before - that most people just want music for free, period.
Just my 2cts..
It would also be nice that when you've got a confirmation that person X will provide a quote, that they will actually do so. ( Come on, people, it takes all of 5 minutes.. if you can't come up with a quote in 5 minutes, then maybe you shouldn't have agreed to providing one )
:)
Rather than having to e-mail and call and just get "oh yeah.. will do that later" and end up having to pull a rather common thing when it comes to quotes:
Making up your own quote, sending that to Person X just for their approval, and using that.
Yep, that's right, they never said what was written, but they agree with it, so hey.
I wonder how much of the reporter's apparently 'unfounded' quotes may have been of this particular type
Just my 2cts
SVG tiny = mobile phones
:
SVG basic = PDAs
SVG = personal computers
And if you'd checked this page
http://www.w3.org/TR/SVGMobile/#sec-eleind, which is Google hit #1 for 'svg tiny', you would see the differences between SVG tiny and SVG basic in terms of supported elements, styles (further down), etc.
In addition, anywhere where SVG basic at least reads "n/a", that's a feature that should be in SVG full.
How many people do you know of that carry a dedicated camera with them at all time ? ;)
Not talking about 'keep it in the glove box', as that requires a car. I can't drive my car up to my desk or into a store
Now compare that to how many people you know of that carry a cellular phone with them at all time.
If you're on the road / down-town / whatever and you see something and would like to take a picture of it, you could..
:)
A. Go home, get camera, return, take picture
B. Whip out the camera phone, take picture, carry on
If your boss calls you up telling you that he would like to see you on saturday at 7pm for a meeting, you could...
A. Remember it, program it into your PDA when you get home
B. Write it down on a piece of paper, program it into your PDA when you get home
C. Whip out your phone and toss it into the calendar app
I have no argument for the MP3 player as I have none
However, if you're a music lover, then why would you run around with a yet-another-device if your phone can play back MP3s just as good as your run-of-the-mill mp3 player ?
Sure, there's interface (hello iPod), but most people really don't use the interface that often. Point in case: iPod Shuffle
Back to your real life example...
Say you're in the bathroom, you open a cupboard door, and notice the knob's a bit loose. You could...
A. Walk into your toolshed / hobby area and fetch yourself a screwdriver, fasten the screw, return the screwdriver
B. Whip out your swiss army knife and fasten the screw
Nobody's saying that these phones will replace DSLRs, a blackberry, an iPod, or your (semi-)professional craftsman tools.
But if my phone had all the tools of my utility knife built-in, I just might find reason not to carry the utility knife around in my pants.
I had a long explanation here, but in short: well-said :)
/nokarma
All I'm saying is.. if you do find out, or reasonably should have been able to find out, that product X 'violates' your patent - and you don't do anything about it for N years (again, I suggest 3. That should be enough ?), then you waive the right to enforce the patent with regards to product X.
If product Y comes along which also 'violates' it, you're still free to tell them to license or get the **** out of your market, as long as you do it within those N years of finding out / when you reasonably should have been able to find out.
As to what defines what 'reasonable' may be, that'd be up to a judge if it would come to that. Should be easier than detangling the mess MS/Forgent are presenting, though.
Some may claim it's not abuse... I suppose it's ot
t ml )
/ 12/0725217&tid=198
Some claim it was a submarine patent... well no, it wasn't. (Look up the definition of a submarine patent first)
However...
- Their patent was issued in October 1987
- Their patent went unenforced until July 2002
That's a 15 year gap.
I know that unlike trademarks, patents need not be enforced. But that's a change I would gladly see made.
So somebody asked what we can do to avoid these things. Unfortunately, as long as patents exist, I don't think we can avoid them.
What we -can- do is decide better how to deal with them.
I'm not one for completely ignoring patents altogether - they have their good uses, even in software.
But in cases such as these, I think that if a patent hasn't been enforced over a certain technology for over N years (I suggest 3), then I think the patent holder should be barred from making any claims to patent infringement.
I'm sure there's plenty of loopholes and problems with this, but the basic principle would be
- you still get to patent stuff
- people still need to respect that patent. So if you make a product and your patent search results in a hit, you still have to license the patent (if applicable)
- you still get to hold those who, somehow, missed your patent accountable for it within an N-year timeframe
- those who somehow missed your patent, and you somehow miss their technology or the realization that it infringes on your patent, for > N years won't suddenly be met with a patent lawsuit
-- which means that any invention that got wildly popular can't suddenly be milked for all its worth because a bunch of suits managed to twist patent interpretations enough to make it applicable to that invention
-- small companies won't be sued out of existance just for missing a patent > N years ago
-----
As for another user's question... what are open (lossy compression) alternatives ? There's plenty of 'open' alternatives. Problem is that there's a patent of some form behind every single one that I'm aware of. The JPEG thing, JPEG2000, Wavelets, Gradient Tesselation, Fractal..
I'm not sure if BTPC actually has any patents associated with it. However, the author claims not.
( http://www.intuac.com/userport/john/btpc5/index.h
-----
Finally.. I wonder what all this Forgent stuff will do, if anything, to the StuffIt guys; http://hardware.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/01
As they use, at least partially, a different compression (to get even smaller files).
If all this Forgent stuff doesn't apply to them, and Forgent gets to keep the patent business going, the Stuffit format may prove to be attractive to some companies as it would require minimal change in code/etc. (at least when compared to a completely different format)
As Adobe themselves state, they expect to have preliminary support for the D2X in May ( http://www.adobe.com/products/photoshop/cameraraw. html )
As the article itself mentions, it's not really that big a deal. It is the white balance parameters as set on the camera when the image was shot that is encrypted. The RAW data isn't directly affected by this, and picking a white-balance preset or performing manual/auto whitebalacing on the RAW data gives you the same/similar/better results (that's partly the point of shooting RAW, no?)
What could be worse is if they encrypted the data as well. This is what SONY does on the F828 and V3, for example.
However, both are supported by Photoshop's RAW support, so I take it they simply licensed or SONY gave them a thumbs up for supporting it. No idea why they encrypt it, though.
Regardless.. that's what would have to happen with any future encrypted formats.. I doubt we've seen the last of them anyway.
If all else fails, get the dcraw utils ( http://www.cybercom.net/~dcoffin/dcraw/ ) and convert from one raw to another. That's where the SONY decryptor is also hosted.
Speaking of dcraw... has Adobe given the author credit yet ?
They're the third... maybe behind by leaps and bounds, but there you have it.
They have a Photoshop alternative of themselves, they have Paintshop Pro as the el-cheapo alternative, they've got Painter, they've got technical drawing, vector drawing, etc. etc.
They even have Wordperfect (*chuckle*) - more importantly, the suite.
That said.. Adobe/Macromedia merger is still sort of scary.
domains.xml updated. Now including the .CAT domain! *groan*
(as usual, don't whine about well-formedness/lack thereof)
Of course, the Autobahn is in Germany, is fairly orderly (compared to U.S. roads, yes), and is more of a 'go with the flow' thing as I mentioned above.
:)
:)
Those wouldn't really benefit from any such setup, though putting the threshold there at 30km/h+ over would be fine with me
I don't think anybody can (sanely) argue for abolishing speed limits altogether, though - imho
The 'gue' in 'Vogue' and 'Rogue' is quite different from a 'g' in the dutch 'Loog', 'Toog', etc.
:)
That 'g' is more like a horrible choking sound - I'd sound it out and put it on my site (I'm Dutch), but no thanks
I'm curious...
:)
Would it be technically possible to make an RFID Firewall solution ?
I'm assuming that these data requests to an RFID can be picked up, as the RFID has to.
I'm similarly assuming that the data sent back can be picked up, as the scanner has to.
So I'm assuming that it is possible to, electronically or mechanically, block either signal.
Additionally, I'm assuming that it's possible to electronically LOG these signals - if at least a timestamp and, if equipped with GPS, GPS location.
Then those with RFID tags could opt to enable the RFID at well, log any (in their view) unauthorized access, etc.
If this doesn't exist yet, why not ? Make it, patent it - make a mint - piss of Slashdot users for patenting it. All that and then some
mile marker 100 = 0s
mile marker 101 = 60s
speed = 1mile/minute = 60 miles/hour
mile marker 100 = 0s
mile marker 101 = 57s
speed ~= 63.16miles/hour
so.. 3 miles over, okay, I agree, would be silly, and cashcow-y, etc. etc.
But what if it was 50 seconds ?
mile marker 100 = 0s
mile marker 101 = 50s
speed = 72miles/hour
Now we're going 12mph over. Certainly that -should- be ticketed, no ?
( except for those long-ass stretches in the U.S. where the basic motto is "go with the flow", and the flow typically goes 80 where it's a 65mph (nighttime) limit )
So the only reasonable argument to be made here is - what would the general populace consider a ticketable offense ?
Or, rather, what would the general populace put up with ? (if some people had their say, there'd be no speed limits at all)
I'd certainly say that if the threshold were, say, 10mph+ over, then you've got nothing to whine about if you do get a ticket (short of hardware malfunction, it not being you who was driving the vehicle, all those arguments and then some)
It's modded Funny for obvious reasons, but I think it should be noted that this is in fact not a laptop; it is a notebook.
Then again, I don't know when I last saw an actual laptop. The terms laptop and notebook have been used as if they're synonyms for quite a while now.
The difference between the two should be obvious. One is designed for use truly 'on the go' - on your lap when riding the bus if need be. That'd be the laptop.
A notebook, on the other hand, may be portable and easy to carry around - but is primarily intended to be used in a proper workspace - and thus on a table/desk/whathaveyou.. just not your lap.
Other differing factors are:
- overall weight (you don't typically want 6lbs+ on your lap, or carry it around a lot)
- overall size (notebook with giant display, too bulky)
- balance (don't want something on your lap that tends to tip over to the left due to all the major electronics being on that side)
- heat (heat should be dissipated and fanned out to the side, airflow intake should be coming from the other side, the back, or in the center/towards the back (so as not to get covered by one's thigh)
- access ports, auxiliary button should be on the side (otherwise you have to set the computer aside when, for example, loading a DVD and the DVD bay inserts at the front. oops..
And probably a few more points I've forgotten since I took that ergonomics class.
*grin*
:) /me slaps self silly /me also waits 20 seconds as per slashdot anti-abuse crapola script.
typo
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Without pulling up the actual specs...
2.2m = 220cm
220cm / 1920pixels = 0.114583cm/pixel
Or, in other terms, about 1.15mm/pixel
1.86m = 187cm
187 / 1080pixels = 0.173148cm/pixel
Or, in other terms, about 1.73mm/pixel
Slightly non-square, I'd imagine if I'd pull up the actual specs of the display panel itself (not the entire casing) I'd get square, and smaller, pixels yet.
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?c ourt=7th&navby=case&no=991754A
d'oh.. totally missed that in TFA - thanks :D
I'm curious... could these be related to 'Sprites' in any way?i teinfo.html
http://www.ess.washington.edu/Space/AtmosElec/spr