Is the LHC dangerous. Quite possibly. Will it destroy the world? Ask British physicist Brian Cox: "Anyone who thinks the LHC will destroy the world is a twat."
"defendant has filed a motion for new trial, attacking, among other things, the constitutionality of the jury's $675,000 award"
Yeah. Good luck with that.
Just like Jammie Thomas before him, Mr. Tenebaum decided to admit that he broke the law and fight a battle based on the the idea that the law is wrong. We saw how well that worked out for both of them. Now, I happen to agree that the law is wrong and that the actual damages suffered by the entire record indusry as a result of "file sharing" is close to zero. However, the chances of convincing the courts that the law is wrong is also somewhere between none and zero.
Ms Thomas, Mr. Tenebaum and their respective attorneys suffer from the same problem. They thought they were going to out-smart the prosecution. Dazzle them with their brilliance and logic. Hit them with a constutional argument that can't be rebutted. And they ran smack into the brick wall of reality.
The sad unfortunate reality is that judges and juries are technologically illiterate. They are easily swayed by words such as "hacker" and "piracy", easily convinced that anyone using a computer may be up to no good and and they are easily convinced that the fine honest upstanding folks of the RIAA are being robbed by evil file-sharers.
It is unfortunate, but the only defense for these cases is DENY DENY DENY. Admit nothing. Deny everything. The RIAA is in error. The information provided by the ISP is wrong or forged by the RIAA. Force them to provide concrete proof of everything. "Innocent until proven guilty" is meaningless if you freely admit that you did exactly that they say you did.
And they're hoping to build an Internet that extends connectivity to the most remote regions of the world, perhaps to other planets.
What "other planets"? Occassionally people will talk about travelling to "other planets". What "planets" are they talking about?
You can't land on Jupiter, Saturn, Nepture or Uranus because they are just gas. Mercury has a temp of around 1100 C and Venus is 900 degrees with a sulfuric acid atmosphere and atmospheric pressure 90 times greater than earth.
So that just leaves Mars. So why don't they just say Mars instead of "other planets"?
Because the Constitution doesn't require a jury of skilled experts.
However, one of the basic principles of the law is "the right to a trial with a jury of your peers". If you sue a corporation over software patents then the jury should be made up of people who understand software, patents and all the complexities. Those are the "peers".
Once the decibel limit is reached the tv set compensates by turning itself down in real time.
Legislate that every TV sold has number 2 on the basis of health and safety. Stiff fines for not complying or trying to circumvent.
Unfortunately, you are just as clueless as the polictians trying to pass laws to address this "problem". So you established a decibel limit of "X". The typical TV program will hit this limit occasionaly, but not very often. The typical commercial will be at.0000001 below X *ALL THE TIME*. That's the key. Because of compression, commercials can sound louder that programs while never exceeding a particular decibel level.
This is nothing new. People have been complaining for decades that commercials are "louder than the programs" and each time the broadcasters say "look at the levels -- the commercials never exceed the same maximum level as the programs".
It's a job where the President consults you for your opinion and takes action based on your advice
Wrong. In 2008 Candidate Obama said he would create a postion reporting directly to him. This year, President Obama created a position of "Cybersecurity Coordinator" which is a low level position reporting to OMB (Office of Management and Budget) and NEC (National Economic Council). In other words, the person in this new position will spend their time writing reports which will then go to the bureaucrats in OMB and NEC who will stamp the reports as "too expensive in these tough economic times".
Little or no information will ever reach the president. And even if it does, so what. It will be up to congress to allocate resources. Good luck with that.
There are literally billions of dollars waiting to be spent in increments as low as fractions of a cent at a time, and yet the infrastructure and fee systems are keeping that commerce from taking place.
Infrastructure costs money. Today you can go anywhere - to a store or on the internet - and purchase something with a credit card and the tranaction will be approved in a matter of seconds. It took many years and LOTS of money to create that infrastructure.
And that's the problem with transactions involving a payment of only a few cents (or fraction of cents). The fee you have to charge in order to pay for all that infrastructure is considerably more than the cost of the transaction itself. The "price floor" is not imaginary or arbitrary, it is real and it is dictated by the cost of the infrastructure needed to handle transactions.
The quantity of apps on the app store suggest that you're mistaken. A few developers have had some high profile troubles (made high profile because they complain loudly...)
Regardless, thousands and thousands and thousands and thousands of developers prove you wrong - it's not that difficult to get an app approved.
Instead of complaining about a few rejections, developers should be complaining about Apple essentially rubber-stamping thousands of apps that are just crappy knock-offs of other (possibly crappy) apps, diluting the value of worthwhile apps.
A few months ago I signed up on Facebook, just for the heck of it. Then I noticed that there were a lot of people I went to High School with on there. Pretty soon I was gettng friend request from them. One day I got a friend request from an old girlfriend who I hadn't seen since graduating. My only memory of her was when she was 17 -- cute with big titties. And then I looked at her current picture.
Q. Do I need permission from my employer to run SETI@home on computers at work?
A. Yes! Of course! We've been saying that for 10 years, and despite what some bloggers have said, Niesluchowski wasn't the first person to lose his job over this. The first time was many years ago.
This should have been the beginning and end of the Q&A. Regardless of the relative merits of SETI@Home or what it does or doesn't do to a computer or network, the bottom line is pretty simple: Install unauthorized software on computers that aren't yours and you get spanked.
What happens when you buy something (music, software, etc) that is infested with DRM and the company controlling the DRM goes out of business? You lose the material you paid for. If you don't own it, you can't control it. If you can't control it, then it *WILL* be taken away from you eventually.
The same applies to "the cloud". You don't own it, you can't control it, and anything you put there will eventually be lost. Whether it's Carbonite going out of business or Google mysteriously deleting your files, it will happen eventually.
the way it persists itself in autostart is really nasty,
Which simply shows that the lack of Linux malware isn't because Linux is somehow magically superior, but simply because nobody has taken the time to write any.
Even better, pretty soon we'll have clueless noobs with their new netbooks running Google's ChromeOS (which they don't know is really Linux because Google is doing everything they can to avoid the "L" word). Now they can get pwned too!!
Yes, Microsoft is going to "slam" Google's Chrome OS. So what. Microsoft's bias is irrelevant. Chrome OS is Linux. Slapping on the Google name may get a few suckers to bite, but ultimately Chrome OS will achieve the same market share as any other Linux. And the few people who actually do buy it will be stuck with a tiny underpowered laptop with limited use.
Remember the "Internet Appliance", WebTV and dedicated word processors. Netbooks will end up in the same dustbin.
"the history of sci-fi's influence on real-world technology, from Jules Verne to Snow Crash"
Sci-Fi influencing real world technology? Do you really think we went to the moon or invented the computer because someone wrote a fictional story about it a hundred years earlier? Not hardly.
"I like Hotel California and all, but the copyright should have expired by now. Period."
Why? Just because you believe so?
No, because the U.S. Constitution says so. You are granted a monopoly, in this case called a copyright, FOR A LIMITED TIME. Unfortunately, copyright law has been constantly changed and extended to ridiculous lengths by the corrupt music industry together with equally corrupt polititions.
I get your point, but in the end, what is the difference? Many people are die hard users of the plugins (I use firefox and I'll never understand the hype) that they insist they could never go without them, and in many cases it's the primary force in their decision to use firefox.
At this point, we have to view GMail like Hotmail, another free email account system made useless by spammers.
Hotmail is widely blocked. Next, Gmail?
I have 2 Gmail accounts but access them via POP3. Gmail's spam filters work perfectly. I get zero spam. Although there are hundreds of spam messages in the spam folder none of them get through to me. Why can't they do the same thing to newsgroups?
Slashdot Mirror
Is the LHC dangerous. Quite possibly. Will it destroy the world? Ask British physicist Brian Cox: "Anyone who thinks the LHC will destroy the world is a twat."
I think that sums it up.
"defendant has filed a motion for new trial, attacking, among other things, the constitutionality of the jury's $675,000 award"
Yeah. Good luck with that.
Just like Jammie Thomas before him, Mr. Tenebaum decided to admit that he broke the law and fight a battle based on the the idea that the law is wrong. We saw how well that worked out for both of them. Now, I happen to agree that the law is wrong and that the actual damages suffered by the entire record indusry as a result of "file sharing" is close to zero. However, the chances of convincing the courts that the law is wrong is also somewhere between none and zero.
Ms Thomas, Mr. Tenebaum and their respective attorneys suffer from the same problem. They thought they were going to out-smart the prosecution. Dazzle them with their brilliance and logic. Hit them with a constutional argument that can't be rebutted. And they ran smack into the brick wall of reality.
The sad unfortunate reality is that judges and juries are technologically illiterate. They are easily swayed by words such as "hacker" and "piracy", easily convinced that anyone using a computer may be up to no good and and they are easily convinced that the fine honest upstanding folks of the RIAA are being robbed by evil file-sharers.
It is unfortunate, but the only defense for these cases is DENY DENY DENY. Admit nothing. Deny everything. The RIAA is in error. The information provided by the ISP is wrong or forged by the RIAA. Force them to provide concrete proof of everything. "Innocent until proven guilty" is meaningless if you freely admit that you did exactly that they say you did.
If Oracle cuts MySQL loose, does Monty have to give back the billion dollars?
What "other planets"? Occassionally people will talk about travelling to "other planets". What "planets" are they talking about?
You can't land on Jupiter, Saturn, Nepture or Uranus because they are just gas. Mercury has a temp of around 1100 C and Venus is 900 degrees with a sulfuric acid atmosphere and atmospheric pressure 90 times greater than earth.
So that just leaves Mars. So why don't they just say Mars instead of "other planets"?
http://www.target.com/gp/search/178-2905776-2539507?field-keywords=your+mom+is+hot&url=index%3Dtarget%26search-alias%3Dtgt-index&ref=sr_bx_1_1&x=0&y=0
However, one of the basic principles of the law is "the right to a trial with a jury of your peers". If you sue a corporation over software patents then the jury should be made up of people who understand software, patents and all the complexities. Those are the "peers".
The government of Cuba is evil.
In other news, water is wet and fire is hot.
Unfortunately, you are just as clueless as the polictians trying to pass laws to address this "problem". So you established a decibel limit of "X". The typical TV program will hit this limit occasionaly, but not very often. The typical commercial will be at .0000001 below X *ALL THE TIME*. That's the key. Because of compression, commercials can sound louder that programs while never exceeding a particular decibel level.
This is nothing new. People have been complaining for decades that commercials are "louder than the programs" and each time the broadcasters say "look at the levels -- the commercials never exceed the same maximum level as the programs".
Wrong. In 2008 Candidate Obama said he would create a postion reporting directly to him. This year, President Obama created a position of "Cybersecurity Coordinator" which is a low level position reporting to OMB (Office of Management and Budget) and NEC (National Economic Council). In other words, the person in this new position will spend their time writing reports which will then go to the bureaucrats in OMB and NEC who will stamp the reports as "too expensive in these tough economic times".
Little or no information will ever reach the president. And even if it does, so what. It will be up to congress to allocate resources. Good luck with that.
Infrastructure costs money. Today you can go anywhere - to a store or on the internet - and purchase something with a credit card and the tranaction will be approved in a matter of seconds. It took many years and LOTS of money to create that infrastructure.
And that's the problem with transactions involving a payment of only a few cents (or fraction of cents). The fee you have to charge in order to pay for all that infrastructure is considerably more than the cost of the transaction itself. The "price floor" is not imaginary or arbitrary, it is real and it is dictated by the cost of the infrastructure needed to handle transactions.
Instead of complaining about a few rejections, developers should be complaining about Apple essentially rubber-stamping thousands of apps that are just crappy knock-offs of other (possibly crappy) apps, diluting the value of worthwhile apps.
Facebook will ruin your life.
A few months ago I signed up on Facebook, just for the heck of it. Then I noticed that there were a lot of people I went to High School with on there. Pretty soon I was gettng friend request from them. One day I got a friend request from an old girlfriend who I hadn't seen since graduating. My only memory of her was when she was 17 -- cute with big titties. And then I looked at her current picture.
She has not aged well.
My fantasies are ruined.
Q. Do I need permission from my employer to run SETI@home on computers at work?
A. Yes! Of course! We've been saying that for 10 years, and despite what some bloggers have said, Niesluchowski wasn't the first person to lose his job over this. The first time was many years ago.
This should have been the beginning and end of the Q&A. Regardless of the relative merits of SETI@Home or what it does or doesn't do to a computer or network, the bottom line is pretty simple: Install unauthorized software on computers that aren't yours and you get spanked.
I'm no fan of Microsoft, but I'm on their side with this one. This is just stupid. There's no reason Microsoft should have to do this.
1. All the browsers listed are free (as in you pay zero for them). Selecting something other than IE gets them exactly zero in additional revenue.
2. If you are too stupid to figure out how to download and install an alternative web browser, how is that Micorsoft's fault or problem?
C. Why not demand that Microsoft offer alternatives to every application that is bundled with Windows? (Notepad, Paintbrush, etc)
What happens when you buy something (music, software, etc) that is infested with DRM and the company controlling the DRM goes out of business? You lose the material you paid for. If you don't own it, you can't control it. If you can't control it, then it *WILL* be taken away from you eventually.
The same applies to "the cloud". You don't own it, you can't control it, and anything you put there will eventually be lost. Whether it's Carbonite going out of business or Google mysteriously deleting your files, it will happen eventually.
Which simply shows that the lack of Linux malware isn't because Linux is somehow magically superior, but simply because nobody has taken the time to write any.
Even better, pretty soon we'll have clueless noobs with their new netbooks running Google's ChromeOS (which they don't know is really Linux because Google is doing everything they can to avoid the "L" word). Now they can get pwned too!!
Can I use all of my moderator points to rate this article as -10 extremely stupid.
Yes, Microsoft is going to "slam" Google's Chrome OS. So what. Microsoft's bias is irrelevant. Chrome OS is Linux. Slapping on the Google name may get a few suckers to bite, but ultimately Chrome OS will achieve the same market share as any other Linux. And the few people who actually do buy it will be stuck with a tiny underpowered laptop with limited use.
Remember the "Internet Appliance", WebTV and dedicated word processors. Netbooks will end up in the same dustbin.
"the history of sci-fi's influence on real-world technology, from Jules Verne to Snow Crash"
Sci-Fi influencing real world technology? Do you really think we went to the moon or invented the computer because someone wrote a fictional story about it a hundred years earlier? Not hardly.
If it hurts, you're doing it wrong.
Chandler Bing has his own search engine.
Wow.
99.99% of the people who claim they can "tell the difference" are full of shit.
No, because the U.S. Constitution says so. You are granted a monopoly, in this case called a copyright, FOR A LIMITED TIME. Unfortunately, copyright law has been constantly changed and extended to ridiculous lengths by the corrupt music industry together with equally corrupt polititions.
You're confusing plugins with extensions.
I have 2 Gmail accounts but access them via POP3. Gmail's spam filters work perfectly. I get zero spam. Although there are hundreds of spam messages in the spam folder none of them get through to me. Why can't they do the same thing to newsgroups?