Plus, it's not like lasting 25x as long takes 25x as much engineering.
Though next time, they should send them in pairs (a sort of "buddy system"). Have them normally maintain a separation of, say, 50 to 500 feet, but be able to pull each other out of a situation where a wheel gets stuck, maybe have one of them equipped with a feather duster to brush off the solar cells for both of them, etc.
Imagine putting 50 of these down and having them just do a march across the desert... at 1000 feet separation, even at half speed (1 inch per second), they could cover a square mile every 2 days (or with better batteries, the could do experiments at night). That would be 1,100 square miles in 6 years.
Come to think of it, why don't we do this on the moon. It's a lot closer. With the much less time delay, you could even get people to volunteer with helping log the data, point out interesting stuff, and even pay for the privilege of "driving" a rover in real time.
with our capitalist systems, we have Constitutions to chain our governments from being abusive,
How would you consider using taxpayer funds to bail out billionaires not government abuse?
Or governments forbidding people to get married based on color (past) or sex (present)?
Capitalism is not necessarily democratic. It can be fascist - capitalists made money under the Nazis. (No wonder it's called "filthy lucre.")
And then we have the current state - corporatism.
BTW I think corporate licenses should be revoked. Let them operate as traditional proprietorships with full liability for their actions. (i.e. Toyota's CEO and management would stand trial for manslaughter.) (Ditto Ford's CEO/management when the 70s-era Pintos were exploding.)
Throw in shareholder liability. People will then have their own self-interest at stake in making ethical investments, instead of feeding the ponzi scheme of exploding mortgages.
A agree 100%. The screen changing the content as he spun the wheel is enough to give you motion sickness! Nice of him to say "you shouldn't be looking at this while you're turning." s/turning/driving/ and he'd be right.
This is an automatic "it's your fault" for any accident - especially since, unlike a cell phone, you can't just slip it in your pocket - and it'll leave an imprint on what's left of your face.
You obviously didn't watch the video - or you would have seen the big disclaimer "SKILLED DRIVER ON CLOSED COURSE". He says it's for use while driving. This is an accident waiting to happen.
And there's a common-law histor of that being illegal:
In common law jurisdictions, maintenance is the intermeddling of an uninterested party to encourage a lawsuit.[1] It is "A taking in hand, a bearing up or upholding of quarrels or sides, to the disturbance of the common right."[2]
Champerty is the maintenance of a person in a lawsuit on condition that the subject matter of the action is to be shared with the maintainer.[3] Among laypersons, this is known as "buying into someone else's lawsuit."
In modern idiom maintenance is the support of litigation by a stranger without just cause. Champerty is an aggravated form of maintenance. The distinguishing feature of champerty is the support of litigation by a stranger in return for a share of the proceeds.
- Lord Justice Steyn , Giles v Thompson[4]
At common law, maintenance and champerty were both crimes and torts, as was barratry, the bringing of vexatious litigation. This is generally no longer so as during the nineteenth century, the development of legal ethics tended to obviate the risks to the public, particularly after the scandal of the Swynfen will case (1856-1864).[5] However, the principles are relevant to modern contingent fee agreements between a lawyer and a client and to the assignment by a plaintiff of his rights in a lawsuit to someone with no connection to the case. Champertous contracts can still, depending on jurisdiction, be void for public policy or attract liability for costs.
Champerty is the practice of agreeing to paticipate and share in the proceeds of a lawsuit, despite not being a proper party to the dispute. The outside party, usually an attorney, bargains to exchange their financing and promotion of the lawsuit in exchange for a share of the recovery.
Champerty is distinguished from barratry, which is the active encouragement of lawsuits. Champerty is prohibited in some jurisdictions; in others, judges are considered to have the responsibility for policing such behavior.
Think of it as someone participating in a lawsuit in which they don't have any legal standing. Their patent isn't being infringed on, it's another patent in the same "pool". This is just a way to sneak past any claims of champerty and maintenance (as in maintenance of a lawsuit that was initiated by someone else).
This entry contains information applicable to United States law only.
Champerty is the process whereby one person bargains with a party to a lawsuit to obtain a share in the proceeds of the suit. Maintenance is the support or promotion of another person's suit initiated by intermeddling for personal gain.
Both champerty and maintenance have been illegal for two basic public policy reasons since early common law: (1) It is considered desirable to curb excess litigation for the operation of an efficient judicial system. The reasons for this are numerous and include problems of overcrowding on court calendars, economic considerations, and the desirability of promoting a society that is not excessively litigious. Champerty and maintenance work contrary to this societal goal by stirring up litigation. (2) Champerty and maintenance bring money to an individual who was not personally harmed by the defendant. An attorney found guilty of either champerty or maintenance will be subject to the payment of any damages that may have been incurred by the parties to the lawsuit and to disciplinary proceedings, which can result in his or her disbarment.
Whether or not champerty and maintenance exist in a particular instance depends upon the facts and circumstances of the case. They apply specifically to cases wherein one person pr
You're not allowed to install any device that interferes with the deployment of the air bag.
Also not allowed to have a video screen less than a certain distance from the driver.
Also not allowed to display movies, etc., on any screen visible to the driver.
We have sane laws up here. Of course, the video I want to see is of his face as the airbag launches the iPad into it at 200 mph.
So after the lawsuits ("Apple is responsible - there was no warning not to attach it to the steering wheel") you'll have t prove you're more intelligent than a pet rock to buy one - and that should kill 90% of the iPad market.
Yeah and what bit do you end up reading to decide what to click on?
[X] I'm a clickbot, you insensitive clod!
For those who don't know, clickbots are used by click fraud artists to click on links to generate false page views. The headline can be a meaningless string and it will STILL get clicked.
Or just ignore them and actually rank by the content!!! line they're supposed to do?
Have you used a search engine before? Have you noticed while you're scrolling through the search results they don't show you the entire content of the page?
Please don't be naive - they have the WHOLE text in their cache, and it's the WHOLE text that is indexed, not just the headline.
It's not that hard - just give the headline less weight in any analysis. Same as not giving any weight to the url string - people try to do "SEO Optimization" by gimmicking the url string and stuffing keywords in it. Just index the actual text, and if the text is outside the headline domain or the url string, deduct 90% from the score and label it as spammy.
Please stop being naive. The video in question (did you even watch it???) deals with the American court system - which is where the whole phone thing is taking place. and where cooperating with the cops counts for nothing. Unless you have a deal with the DA, you have NOTHING. Watch the video. Listen to the cop with 2 decades of experience, and the law professor, both tell you why you should not talk to the police. The police simply have no authority to make any such decision, or to tell the judge that you should receive different treatment because you cooperated. And your refusal to answer questions can never be held against you, not when talking to the cops, not even when being questioned in court (see 5th amendment issues, among others).
The 5th amendment recognizes that innocent people can refuse to answer any question, on the grounds that it may tend to make it look like they're guilty, and it cannot be used to imply guilt. So no more "do you still beat your wife" questions, no "trick questions". And you are never required to do more than identify yourself to the police. If you're in a store and the cops ask "is that your car out there" you don't have to answer.
BTW - one of their references is a supreme court judge, who says that he would not talk to the police.
XML is not a markup language XML does not deserver its "ML", or even its "X". But first, the "ML" part.
I am one of the world's leading experts on markup languages. I'll start there. I'm a 20-year veteran of desktop publishing, am personally related to the author of one of the very first markup languages in the world (Scribe), and have actually used SGML, MML, HTML, and most of the other markup languages that came along decades before XML.
So I know what I'm talking about. XML is not a markup language.
A markup language is predicated on the idea that the markup is an exception in a river of text. That is, the markup is a departure from the state that existed at the time the markup was encountered.
One of the first instances of this was the TROFF mechanism in UNIX, used for formatting "man pages". A simple example was that a line that started with.i was italic. So you might format a sentence with an italic word in it like this:
Here is an .i emphasized phrase and back to normal text
The same basic approach is used in HTML, except that it's not line-oriented, so you need a "close delimiter" other than carriage return (which is actually a pretty handy closing delimiter, but I digress). So the same thing in HTML is:
Here is an <i>emphasized phrase</i> and back to normal text.
The idea of markup is that you literally mark up a text, "circling" things, if you will, giving instructions to the typesetter (or parser, or other) that this snippet of text is to be treated somehow differently.
Another tenet of a markup language is that only the syntax is specified. The semantics of what the markup means is implicit (HTML) or described earlier (Scribe) or some combination of the two (CSS).
But here's the real kicker: a pure ASCII text file is a valid example of any markup language. That underscores the notion that the markup is a departure from the river of text. So a plain text file is technically a valid HTML file (though they ruined that purity with XHTML and CSS by requiring tags in it, but that's because they too didn't really know what a markup language was).
Monday, December 11, 2006 XML as a "container" XML is most often used as a kind of container to hold structured data of some kind. The semantic nature of the data is not defined by XML itself, but typically is carried separately as a data definition or simply by being programmed into the model itself, which is the more common approach (e.g. "this XML file contains preference data" or "this XML file contains a Technorati Ping").
There is one big problem with XML as a container. Its syntax, which is borrowed from HTML and SGML, involves angle brackets and a begin/end paradigm. The problem with this is that you can't embed similar data inside the XML file without escaping all the angle brackets. That gets messy very fast. It also is impossible to nest to arbitrary depth. That is, you can't have an XML file that contains an XML file that contains an HTML file without knowing beforehand how many times to un-escape the data when parsing it.
It also makes it essentially impossible to embed binary data in an XML file because you can't know whether or not to escape the XML sequences within the binary data (you should NOT, if the binary data is to be respected).
This is a classic problem with file formats which require parsing of the data and in which the delimiters themselves might be embedded. You have to recognize nested delimiters and/or escape them.
But does it really make violence "inherently not bad"?
No need to go that far. There's no such thing as "good" or "bad" - just "good from my point of view" or "bad from my point of view."
To you, bacon and eggs is a good breakfast. To the chicken, it's genocide, and to the pig, it's murder.
You might enjoy "sport fishing". You say "I do catch-and-release, see how good I am?" The fish would be more likely to see it as wanton torture. You're inflicting pain on an animal that did nothing to you solely for your pleasure.
Sure. Exactly like it had been if he had stolen it from within Apple.
No. If he had broken into Apple and taken the phone, then trade secret would still apply. He made the initial discovery because of Apple's negligence in leaving the phone where anyone could just pick it up.
And btw, I've argued (and won) enough cases in civil, criminal, and regulatory boards to know how to read the statutes. Go spend a thousand hours in court and win a few cases, and maybe your opinion might be better-informed.
You might want to quit while you're behind. XML is the worst thing to come down the pike, it is bloated, and software to manipulate it in every language suffers performance problems, It's just one big fuck-up. Like the java class structure.
Apple leaving it in public was negligence. Once someone finds it, it simply has NO trade secret protection. It ends right there.
What happens afterward cannot "restore" trade secret status. The act of negligently leaking it to the public is irreversible. Like losing your virginity.
Read the law - "disclosed" include accidental disclosure by Apple's negligence. At that point, it is no longer a trade secret.
Additionally, grand theft doesn't count either. What is the retail price of an iPhone 4g? We'll know next month, but it sure as hell will be less than a grand.
"But it was a prototype!!! It's priceless!" No, it's priceless to Apple. The market establishes the value. You may think YOU 1999 Neon is worth the moon because you lost your virginity in it to CowboyNeal - it's not. The retail market will put an upper limit on how much it's worth. Then you have to deduct $$$ because it was bricked. What's a bricked phone worth? Less than retail for sure.
Slashdot Mirror
Plus, it's not like lasting 25x as long takes 25x as much engineering.
Though next time, they should send them in pairs (a sort of "buddy system"). Have them normally maintain a separation of, say, 50 to 500 feet, but be able to pull each other out of a situation where a wheel gets stuck, maybe have one of them equipped with a feather duster to brush off the solar cells for both of them, etc.
Imagine putting 50 of these down and having them just do a march across the desert ... at 1000 feet separation, even at half speed (1 inch per second), they could cover a square mile every 2 days (or with better batteries, the could do experiments at night). That would be 1,100 square miles in 6 years.
Come to think of it, why don't we do this on the moon. It's a lot closer. With the much less time delay, you could even get people to volunteer with helping log the data, point out interesting stuff, and even pay for the privilege of "driving" a rover in real time.
How would you consider using taxpayer funds to bail out billionaires not government abuse?
Or governments forbidding people to get married based on color (past) or sex (present)?
Capitalism is not necessarily democratic. It can be fascist - capitalists made money under the Nazis. (No wonder it's called "filthy lucre.")
And then we have the current state - corporatism.
Throw in shareholder liability. People will then have their own self-interest at stake in making ethical investments, instead of feeding the ponzi scheme of exploding mortgages.
[/quote]
[b]I feel your pain.[/b]
Really, why can't slashdot at least get with the 90's? ::evil::
As for the suicides, There's an App called [i]Paging Dr. Kevorkian.[/i]
... also, the manufacturing facilities are so state-of-the-crackhouse.
A agree 100%. The screen changing the content as he spun the wheel is enough to give you motion sickness! Nice of him to say "you shouldn't be looking at this while you're turning." s/turning/driving/ and he'd be right.
This is an automatic "it's your fault" for any accident - especially since, unlike a cell phone, you can't just slip it in your pocket - and it'll leave an imprint on what's left of your face.
You obviously didn't watch the video - or you would have seen the big disclaimer "SKILLED DRIVER ON CLOSED COURSE". He says it's for use while driving. This is an accident waiting to happen.
So it's safe to say you're not Sarah Palin posting under an alias :-)
Also not allowed to have a video screen less than a certain distance from the driver.
Also not allowed to display movies, etc., on any screen visible to the driver.
We have sane laws up here. Of course, the video I want to see is of his face as the airbag launches the iPad into it at 200 mph.
So after the lawsuits ("Apple is responsible - there was no warning not to attach it to the steering wheel") you'll have t prove you're more intelligent than a pet rock to buy one - and that should kill 90% of the iPad market.
POKE!
Next stop - THE POKEY!
[X] I'm a clickbot, you insensitive clod!
For those who don't know, clickbots are used by click fraud artists to click on links to generate false page views. The headline can be a meaningless string and it will STILL get clicked.
Of course, now that people will be able to fish for oil right off the pier, shouldn't oil prices go down?
BTW - 640g people should be enough for everyone.
Please don't be naive - they have the WHOLE text in their cache, and it's the WHOLE text that is indexed, not just the headline.
It's not that hard - just give the headline less weight in any analysis. Same as not giving any weight to the url string - people try to do "SEO Optimization" by gimmicking the url string and stuffing keywords in it. Just index the actual text, and if the text is outside the headline domain or the url string, deduct 90% from the score and label it as spammy.
Because it's fugly?
Or just ignore them and actually rank by the content!!! line they're supposed to do?
http://arstechnica.com/civis/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=891505&p=16510422#p16510422 - a collection of apk (Alexander Peter Kowalski) trollspam.
http://arstechnica.com/civis/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=1046804http://www.thorschrock.com/2008/05/19/how-to-respond-when-people-threaten-to-sue-you-on-the-web/
http://arstechnica.com/civis/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=1046804
http://arstechnica.com/civis/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=453001
http://www.jeremyreimer.com/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=4128 The "I have a lawyer and I'm going to sue the Internets" thread - very funny. Thee are updates on subsequent pages mixed in with the comments.
http://www.jeremyreimer.com/APKware/index.html screenshots
Please stop being naive. The video in question (did you even watch it???) deals with the American court system - which is where the whole phone thing is taking place. and where cooperating with the cops counts for nothing. Unless you have a deal with the DA, you have NOTHING. Watch the video. Listen to the cop with 2 decades of experience, and the law professor, both tell you why you should not talk to the police. The police simply have no authority to make any such decision, or to tell the judge that you should receive different treatment because you cooperated. And your refusal to answer questions can never be held against you, not when talking to the cops, not even when being questioned in court (see 5th amendment issues, among others).
The 5th amendment recognizes that innocent people can refuse to answer any question, on the grounds that it may tend to make it look like they're guilty, and it cannot be used to imply guilt. So no more "do you still beat your wife" questions, no "trick questions". And you are never required to do more than identify yourself to the police. If you're in a store and the cops ask "is that your car out there" you don't have to answer.
BTW - one of their references is a supreme court judge, who says that he would not talk to the police.
XML is not a markup language
and http://xmlsucks.blogspot.com/2006/12/xml-as-container.html
No need to go that far. There's no such thing as "good" or "bad" - just "good from my point of view" or "bad from my point of view."
To you, bacon and eggs is a good breakfast. To the chicken, it's genocide, and to the pig, it's murder.
You might enjoy "sport fishing". You say "I do catch-and-release, see how good I am?" The fish would be more likely to see it as wanton torture. You're inflicting pain on an animal that did nothing to you solely for your pleasure.
No. If he had broken into Apple and taken the phone, then trade secret would still apply. He made the initial discovery because of Apple's negligence in leaving the phone where anyone could just pick it up.
And btw, I've argued (and won) enough cases in civil, criminal, and regulatory boards to know how to read the statutes. Go spend a thousand hours in court and win a few cases, and maybe your opinion might be better-informed.
You might want to quit while you're behind. XML is the worst thing to come down the pike, it is bloated, and software to manipulate it in every language suffers performance problems, It's just one big fuck-up. Like the java class structure.
Apple leaving it in public was negligence. Once someone finds it, it simply has NO trade secret protection. It ends right there.
What happens afterward cannot "restore" trade secret status. The act of negligently leaking it to the public is irreversible. Like losing your virginity.
Read the law - "disclosed" include accidental disclosure by Apple's negligence. At that point, it is no longer a trade secret.
Additionally, grand theft doesn't count either. What is the retail price of an iPhone 4g? We'll know next month, but it sure as hell will be less than a grand.
"But it was a prototype!!! It's priceless!" No, it's priceless to Apple. The market establishes the value. You may think YOU 1999 Neon is worth the moon because you lost your virginity in it to CowboyNeal - it's not. The retail market will put an upper limit on how much it's worth. Then you have to deduct $$$ because it was bricked. What's a bricked phone worth? Less than retail for sure.