Cricket does not requre a service contract. Can walk in or go to their web page, buy a phone, chose a service plan, setup service, and be all set to go.
I know there are a few others that dont requre a service agreement, I cant remember them off hand.
Some carriers also have prepaid options that do not require a contract, but those tend to work alot differently than having a plan.
Camera zooms in, sees desk, zooms in further, sees person behind desk.."And now for something completely different..." just as a giant foot slams down on the desk and the person behind it.
Hey look at this, I found the origional patent for fire. Guess I get to sue anyone that uses fire for infringing on my family patent. Anyone who makes lighters, firewood, fireplaces, stoves, ovens, cars, planes, etc. Im rich man Im rich!
You know what they say about the Wiimote. Swinging leads to strap breaking, strap braking leads to throwing, throwing leads to Injury. I see many injuries in the future of this game.
Looking over this article there are a few things I have noticed in it. For one, he was suspended, not fired, those are two different things.
The article states he was a manager, which meens he didnt own it as a franchise. Which all leads to the question, what is company policy?
Some companies have policies setup that allow managers to experiment and create their own promotions, some are strict on it. Some cities do have laws that allow the seller to refuse sale to anyone. If the company has an open promo policy, and the business is in an area with a refuse to sell law, I see no reason why he was suspended. Sounds to me like its a case that might have been against company policy.
Quote from article "On his own, Scott decided to stop selling video games to any school-age customer unless an adult would vouch for the student's good grades." A few things to look at with that comment. 1) not selling to unacompanied minors, which I dont think any game store should be doing anyway, and 2)adult verification that they could buy the game. Im not seeing that as refusal to sell, Im seeing that as keeping the parents in the loop as to what their kids are doing. Parents should know what games their kids are playing, and if the game stores dont sell without parental approvial, then the parents will have a better idea of what the kids are wanting and playing.
I am all for rewarding good grades, were allot of programs like that when I was growing up, should be more now. Giving a discount or free games to those that get good grades, charging full price to those that dont seems fair.
What it all boils down to, is the guys heart was in the right place, someone in the company didnt like it cause they thought it would loose them sales/give them bad PR and suspended him untill they could research it. Personaly I hope they do institue this as a company wide policy, as then the parents will have to get more involved with their kids.
Maybe Im not understanding or missing something, but couldnt a photonic drive powerful enough to move a ship potentialy also be used as a weapon? Or have I just been reading too much Larry Niven.
Both France and Germany blocking information related with WWII Nazi, China blocking mostly everything, now they want to try blocking bomb making data. Not going to happen, once the genie is let out, cant put them back. If someone wants to find a certin piece of information that has been released, all they need to do is a proper internet search, maybe going around blocked sites, or going to ftp sites, book stores, or other ways of getting the information. Worst comes to worst there is always black market.
I am not saying I condone the use of such data, just that where there is a will to find it, someone will find it.
They already are. Piracy of Windows is so rampant over there, MS acualy endorses it in China, just so they can be the main OS that is used in China. Reference link and related clip from article below.
'Today Gates openly concedes that tolerating piracy turned out to be Microsoft's best long-term strategy. That's why Windows is used on an estimated 90% of China's 120 million PCs. "It's easier for our software to compete with Linux when there's piracy than when there's not," Gates says. "Are you kidding? You can get the real thing, and you get the same price." Indeed, in China's back alleys, Linux often costs more than Windows because it requires more disks. And Microsoft's own prices have dropped so low it now sells a $3 package of Windows and Office to students.'
Might want to doublecheck your facts on the speed limits. Yes a national speed limit was imposed in 1974 to bring it down to 55MPH. This was put into effect by Nixon, not Carter. In 1987 it was raised to 65MPH and in 1995 was repealed all together. So currently there is no national speed limit. I do not know where your getting a 40MPH limit, unless it is on a local road and not a highway or expressway. Currently in the US, speed limits are imposed by each state government not the federal governmnet.
If these were fines dealing with a secured network, I could understand the fines being charged. Through an unsecured network though, not so sure.
The way I have always looked at it, is its up to the owner of the wireless network/home/car/etc, to make sure its secured, or deal with the consequences. Car isnt locked, it gets broken into, things messed around, taken, or the entire car stolen. House isnt secure, it gets broken into, things messed around, possibly stolen. Wireless network isnt secure, people will use it, using up ones bandwidth, downloading items that may violate ones ISP TOS policies, or other activities that could get traced back to the wireless owner instead of the person using the wireless connection that isnt supposed to.
So what do we do to stop this, security. Cars have locks, and some security systems that alert when someone has tried breaking into them. Houses, same thing. Wireless networking also has its form of locks(encryption, MAC address authentication, etc), and break in notification(logs), and are great tools.....IF they are used.
Im no legal expert, but with all the book stores, coffee shops, and other places offering free unsecured wireless access points, I could see someone getting off by using the defence 'I thought it was public'. If there isnt a wall, door, lock, or other obstruction in the way, the average person is going to think that its ok for them to walk through a given area. How can we expect anything different of the average wireless user? How else can we expect someone to know they shouldnt tread in a certin area without obstructions blocking their path, or signs stating such? How can we punish someone for going into such an area if they have not been made adequatly aware that they are trespassing?
For those not running a business that wishes to have a publicly accessable unsecured wireless network, go ahead. Just be careful of the problems that can occur from having it unsecure. People will use your bandwidth, people will use it to download things you dont want them to, and people will use it for activities that you may not want them to that may be illegal and/or immoral.
If you dont want the above to happen, or other things that I am not thinking of, then secure your networks. Someone getting into a secure network that was never given access is doing the electronic equivalent of breaking and entering at that point. Anything they do at that point outside of that, as far as I can tell, is also illegal and can and should be prosicuted due to their breaking encryption and entering the network without permission.
In short, locks arnt any good if not used, are only as good as the person(s) that designed them, and arnt 100% secure; IE where there is a lock there is someone that will be able to pick it. If your not using your locks, your to blame, if you are and it gets broken, its the person that broke it thats to blame.
I can see the benifits in this tech, especialy in asisting those that have undergone tramatic experiances. I also see the great potential in abuse. The movie Paycheck comes to mind as one example. Get someone to come in on a top secret project, then wipe their memories when they finished it. More humaine than what they did with tomb designers, still wrong.
Or what of someone kidnaping a key witness in a trial, and giving them a dose. Boom, no more witness without killing them, heck they would probly even forget that they were kidnapped.
I guess it boils down to, just because we can do something, like develop a memory wipeing device, should we??
When looking at missing/damaged tiles, the only shuttles that can be considered are the ones that acualy had to go through the ordeal of launch, reentry, and landing.
Tiles have gone missing during launch from the shuttle before and landed ok. The Columbia disaster happened due to the damage of the wing beyond the tiles. There was litteraly a hole in the leading edge of the wing.
I would be more worried finding the skin under the tile was damaged than finding the tiles were damaged. I think this is more PR of them showing they are trying to keep it safe and reactionary journalism than an acual problem.
With that said, I also reserve the right to be wrong.
"$75 per year for 25 gigabytes of storage; $250 per year for 100 gigabytes of storage; and $500 per year for 250 gigabytes of storage.' Is this too expensive for what there offering, or are you going to make use of it?"
Um...ok, using pricewatch for estimates, for $75 I can get a 250GB USB or a 320GB SATA drive, for $100 one can get a 400GB USB or a 500GB SATA drive, and for less than $500 you can get 4 500GB USB or 5 500GB SATA drives. How is this cost effective?
Ether they are taking traffic jams into account or they dont expect these robots to do more than 10-15mph.
So, what if they all come into the finish line with traffic violation tickets under their windshields for moving too slow? Would they then award it to the one with the fewest tickets?:)
Corse Im assuming that by 'following California traffic laws' that they would be required to have licence plates, not tailgate, travel the speed limit, etc. Wouldnt that also meen the robots would need valid drivers licences, insurance, and registration?
When I say this, I know Im not a lawyer. I dont know how accurate my point of view is, this is just my interpretation of what Im seeing of this case.
Ignoring the reason for the case, drunk driving, Im looking at what they wish to use as evidence. In this case the testing equipment used, IE the breath tester. If a test, breath test, blood test, etc, is to be used in a court case, the equipment used for said teast could also be called into question and itself be on trial. How the equipment is handled or mishandled, manufactured, operates, used, etc, can all be called into question, in whole or part.
What if this turned out to be a physical component that was in question? Would the state have the same objections to the defence wanting to review the product in question?
For an example, say this was a car, not a breath tester, that was in question, and this car was known to have a faulty gas tank. Would the state say "No you can not get this information from the manufacturer, becase the state owns that car and it is all ours now." or would they let it through?
The way I see it, the software a device runs on is just as much a part of said device as a bolt or a battery. If they can give legal reasons for questioning a screw that holds something together, or a gear that turns a part, then they can question the software that runs it also. Copyright does not factor into this at all, which is what the state is trying to say.
This is not being done to illegaly reproduce the code, this is not being done to copy the work done into another product, this is being done to anaylise its effectiveness, see where bugs are, etc, for a case already in a court of law. If they were trying to copy the code, resell it illegaly, or use it as part of another product, I could see copyright applying. Not in this case.
..that this took place soon after the announcement that Northrop Grumman was taking full control of Scaled Composites? I may be wrong, I may be paranoid and its just a big coincidence, I may be right on also. Just seems odd to me.
I am sorry to hear people were hurt, I hate seeing news items like this. I hope that everyone that lived is ok and that it turns out the problem was a mechanical failure or something simular as opposed to neglegence or sabatoge.
This is discussing using waste treatment facilities to grow the algae needed to fuel aircraft. So build the airports and water treatment facilities next to each other. A few things Im looking at when I say that, 1) noone wants to live near ether 2) both are usualy in industrial areas anyway 3)shorter distance for the biofuel to travel to get to the aircraft.
I dont know how to figure this out, but if one takes a look at all the sewage treatment facilities around the world, what would the total area of them be?
Also something else to take into account, it is talking about NET CO2 being reduced to 0. From what I can tell that meens that if 100% of all aircraft were running on this algae made biofuel, the production of CO2 from aircraft would balance the CO2 intake of the algae used to make the biofuel. It isnt saying that they would no longer make CO2, just it would balance with natural intake by organic processes such as algae growth. Nice goal, probly wont happen for a while though. It would meen aircraft moving completely away from the finite nonrenewable resorces of oil.
It looks like something worthy of trying, does make me wonder if Big Oil is going to try something against this though. People have been fighting to get electric, hydrogen, biodiesel, and other nonoil vehicles on the road for years. Just sounds to me like this war has finaly gotten wings.
Slashdot Mirror
Cricket does not requre a service contract. Can walk in or go to their web page, buy a phone, chose a service plan, setup service, and be all set to go.
I know there are a few others that dont requre a service agreement, I cant remember them off hand.
Some carriers also have prepaid options that do not require a contract, but those tend to work alot differently than having a plan.
Camera zooms in, sees desk, zooms in further, sees person behind desk.."And now for something completely different..." just as a giant foot slams down on the desk and the person behind it.
Hey look at this, I found the origional patent for fire. Guess I get to sue anyone that uses fire for infringing on my family patent. Anyone who makes lighters, firewood, fireplaces, stoves, ovens, cars, planes, etc. Im rich man Im rich!
eh I can dream anyway
You know what they say about the Wiimote. Swinging leads to strap breaking, strap braking leads to throwing, throwing leads to Injury. I see many injuries in the future of this game.
Looking over this article there are a few things I have noticed in it. For one, he was suspended, not fired, those are two different things.
The article states he was a manager, which meens he didnt own it as a franchise. Which all leads to the question, what is company policy?
Some companies have policies setup that allow managers to experiment and create their own promotions, some are strict on it. Some cities do have laws that allow the seller to refuse sale to anyone. If the company has an open promo policy, and the business is in an area with a refuse to sell law, I see no reason why he was suspended. Sounds to me like its a case that might have been against company policy.
Quote from article "On his own, Scott decided to stop selling video games to any school-age customer unless an adult would vouch for the student's good grades." A few things to look at with that comment. 1) not selling to unacompanied minors, which I dont think any game store should be doing anyway, and 2)adult verification that they could buy the game. Im not seeing that as refusal to sell, Im seeing that as keeping the parents in the loop as to what their kids are doing. Parents should know what games their kids are playing, and if the game stores dont sell without parental approvial, then the parents will have a better idea of what the kids are wanting and playing.
I am all for rewarding good grades, were allot of programs like that when I was growing up, should be more now. Giving a discount or free games to those that get good grades, charging full price to those that dont seems fair.
What it all boils down to, is the guys heart was in the right place, someone in the company didnt like it cause they thought it would loose them sales/give them bad PR and suspended him untill they could research it. Personaly I hope they do institue this as a company wide policy, as then the parents will have to get more involved with their kids.
Maybe Im not understanding or missing something, but couldnt a photonic drive powerful enough to move a ship potentialy also be used as a weapon? Or have I just been reading too much Larry Niven.
Both France and Germany blocking information related with WWII Nazi, China blocking mostly everything, now they want to try blocking bomb making data. Not going to happen, once the genie is let out, cant put them back. If someone wants to find a certin piece of information that has been released, all they need to do is a proper internet search, maybe going around blocked sites, or going to ftp sites, book stores, or other ways of getting the information. Worst comes to worst there is always black market.
I am not saying I condone the use of such data, just that where there is a will to find it, someone will find it.
They already are. Piracy of Windows is so rampant over there, MS acualy endorses it in China, just so they can be the main OS that is used in China. Reference link and related clip from article below.
c hive/2007/07/23/100134488/
http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_ar
'Today Gates openly concedes that tolerating piracy turned out to be Microsoft's best long-term strategy. That's why Windows is used on an estimated 90% of China's 120 million PCs. "It's easier for our software to compete with Linux when there's piracy than when there's not," Gates says. "Are you kidding? You can get the real thing, and you get the same price." Indeed, in China's back alleys, Linux often costs more than Windows because it requires more disks. And Microsoft's own prices have dropped so low it now sells a $3 package of Windows and Office to students.'
Only in the Steven Spielberg remake of Duke Nukem.
Might want to doublecheck your facts on the speed limits. Yes a national speed limit was imposed in 1974 to bring it down to 55MPH. This was put into effect by Nixon, not Carter. In 1987 it was raised to 65MPH and in 1995 was repealed all together. So currently there is no national speed limit. I do not know where your getting a 40MPH limit, unless it is on a local road and not a highway or expressway. Currently in the US, speed limits are imposed by each state government not the federal governmnet.
e d_Law and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_limits_in_the_U nited_States
In reference I found the following, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Maximum_Spe
If these were fines dealing with a secured network, I could understand the fines being charged. Through an unsecured network though, not so sure.
The way I have always looked at it, is its up to the owner of the wireless network/home/car/etc, to make sure its secured, or deal with the consequences. Car isnt locked, it gets broken into, things messed around, taken, or the entire car stolen. House isnt secure, it gets broken into, things messed around, possibly stolen. Wireless network isnt secure, people will use it, using up ones bandwidth, downloading items that may violate ones ISP TOS policies, or other activities that could get traced back to the wireless owner instead of the person using the wireless connection that isnt supposed to.
So what do we do to stop this, security. Cars have locks, and some security systems that alert when someone has tried breaking into them. Houses, same thing. Wireless networking also has its form of locks(encryption, MAC address authentication, etc), and break in notification(logs), and are great tools.....IF they are used.
Im no legal expert, but with all the book stores, coffee shops, and other places offering free unsecured wireless access points, I could see someone getting off by using the defence 'I thought it was public'. If there isnt a wall, door, lock, or other obstruction in the way, the average person is going to think that its ok for them to walk through a given area. How can we expect anything different of the average wireless user? How else can we expect someone to know they shouldnt tread in a certin area without obstructions blocking their path, or signs stating such? How can we punish someone for going into such an area if they have not been made adequatly aware that they are trespassing?
For those not running a business that wishes to have a publicly accessable unsecured wireless network, go ahead. Just be careful of the problems that can occur from having it unsecure. People will use your bandwidth, people will use it to download things you dont want them to, and people will use it for activities that you may not want them to that may be illegal and/or immoral.
If you dont want the above to happen, or other things that I am not thinking of, then secure your networks. Someone getting into a secure network that was never given access is doing the electronic equivalent of breaking and entering at that point. Anything they do at that point outside of that, as far as I can tell, is also illegal and can and should be prosicuted due to their breaking encryption and entering the network without permission.
In short, locks arnt any good if not used, are only as good as the person(s) that designed them, and arnt 100% secure; IE where there is a lock there is someone that will be able to pick it. If your not using your locks, your to blame, if you are and it gets broken, its the person that broke it thats to blame.
I can see the benifits in this tech, especialy in asisting those that have undergone tramatic experiances. I also see the great potential in abuse. The movie Paycheck comes to mind as one example. Get someone to come in on a top secret project, then wipe their memories when they finished it. More humaine than what they did with tomb designers, still wrong.
Or what of someone kidnaping a key witness in a trial, and giving them a dose. Boom, no more witness without killing them, heck they would probly even forget that they were kidnapped.
I guess it boils down to, just because we can do something, like develop a memory wipeing device, should we??
You realy cant count the Enterprise in this, it was a test orbiter that never left the atmosphere.
i ters/enterprise.html "Following in the Enterprise's, the orbiter Columbia was created and it became the first Space Shuttle to fly into Earth orbit in 1981. "
s -newsref/sts_sys.html#sts-hrsi
http://science.ksc.nasa.gov/shuttle/resources/orb
When looking at missing/damaged tiles, the only shuttles that can be considered are the ones that acualy had to go through the ordeal of launch, reentry, and landing.
Tiles have gone missing during launch from the shuttle before and landed ok. The Columbia disaster happened due to the damage of the wing beyond the tiles. There was litteraly a hole in the leading edge of the wing.
Another thing to keep in mind is these tiles, while able to withstand great heat, are also fragile. http://science.ksc.nasa.gov/shuttle/technology/st
I would be more worried finding the skin under the tile was damaged than finding the tiles were damaged. I think this is more PR of them showing they are trying to keep it safe and reactionary journalism than an acual problem.
With that said, I also reserve the right to be wrong.
"$75 per year for 25 gigabytes of storage; $250 per year for 100 gigabytes of storage; and $500 per year for 250 gigabytes of storage.' Is this too expensive for what there offering, or are you going to make use of it?"
Um...ok, using pricewatch for estimates, for $75 I can get a 250GB USB or a 320GB SATA drive, for $100 one can get a 400GB USB or a 500GB SATA drive, and for less than $500 you can get 4 500GB USB or 5 500GB SATA drives. How is this cost effective?
Ether they are taking traffic jams into account or they dont expect these robots to do more than 10-15mph.
:)
So, what if they all come into the finish line with traffic violation tickets under their windshields for moving too slow? Would they then award it to the one with the fewest tickets?
Corse Im assuming that by 'following California traffic laws' that they would be required to have licence plates, not tailgate, travel the speed limit, etc. Wouldnt that also meen the robots would need valid drivers licences, insurance, and registration?
When I say this, I know Im not a lawyer. I dont know how accurate my point of view is, this is just my interpretation of what Im seeing of this case.
Ignoring the reason for the case, drunk driving, Im looking at what they wish to use as evidence. In this case the testing equipment used, IE the breath tester. If a test, breath test, blood test, etc, is to be used in a court case, the equipment used for said teast could also be called into question and itself be on trial. How the equipment is handled or mishandled, manufactured, operates, used, etc, can all be called into question, in whole or part.
What if this turned out to be a physical component that was in question? Would the state have the same objections to the defence wanting to review the product in question?
For an example, say this was a car, not a breath tester, that was in question, and this car was known to have a faulty gas tank. Would the state say "No you can not get this information from the manufacturer, becase the state owns that car and it is all ours now." or would they let it through?
The way I see it, the software a device runs on is just as much a part of said device as a bolt or a battery. If they can give legal reasons for questioning a screw that holds something together, or a gear that turns a part, then they can question the software that runs it also. Copyright does not factor into this at all, which is what the state is trying to say.
This is not being done to illegaly reproduce the code, this is not being done to copy the work done into another product, this is being done to anaylise its effectiveness, see where bugs are, etc, for a case already in a court of law. If they were trying to copy the code, resell it illegaly, or use it as part of another product, I could see copyright applying. Not in this case.
Just my point of view in this case.
Belunar
..that this took place soon after the announcement that Northrop Grumman was taking full control of Scaled Composites? I may be wrong, I may be paranoid and its just a big coincidence, I may be right on also. Just seems odd to me.
2 1/2114226&from=rss
Article on buyout http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/07/
I am sorry to hear people were hurt, I hate seeing news items like this. I hope that everyone that lived is ok and that it turns out the problem was a mechanical failure or something simular as opposed to neglegence or sabatoge.
Just curious, know where Kudzu is in that list?
This is discussing using waste treatment facilities to grow the algae needed to fuel aircraft. So build the airports and water treatment facilities next to each other. A few things Im looking at when I say that, 1) noone wants to live near ether 2) both are usualy in industrial areas anyway 3)shorter distance for the biofuel to travel to get to the aircraft.
I dont know how to figure this out, but if one takes a look at all the sewage treatment facilities around the world, what would the total area of them be?
Also something else to take into account, it is talking about NET CO2 being reduced to 0. From what I can tell that meens that if 100% of all aircraft were running on this algae made biofuel, the production of CO2 from aircraft would balance the CO2 intake of the algae used to make the biofuel. It isnt saying that they would no longer make CO2, just it would balance with natural intake by organic processes such as algae growth. Nice goal, probly wont happen for a while though. It would meen aircraft moving completely away from the finite nonrenewable resorces of oil.
It looks like something worthy of trying, does make me wonder if Big Oil is going to try something against this though. People have been fighting to get electric, hydrogen, biodiesel, and other nonoil vehicles on the road for years. Just sounds to me like this war has finaly gotten wings.
Just my opinions