I think hand writing with a pen or pencil requires much more physical dexterity than smearing your fingers onto a flat surface. Schooling used to require daily hand written exercise for years, even just taking notes for a few minutes each day - I do think it matters.
Beyond that, doing things that require using ones hands to manipulate objects develops skills in so so doing. My coworkers are often surprised I can reach behind a machine and screw in or unscrew items by feel without looking at them.
So playing games while you're worried takes your mind off things? Well gosh. Whoda thunk it? It's almost as if for some people, that's the whole point of video games, avoiding a shitty life by achieving flow in another world where their lives don't suck. I'm glad valuable grant money was spent on such an unexpected outcome that will certainly pave the way for exciting developments. Hey, look at it this way: these results are likely replicable, unlike most of the rest of the "science" produced by the humanities.
Hey, they also discovered other activities that takes your mind off of something is soothing: In place of Tetris, in which blocks are flipped every which way and stacked into rows, one can substitute flow activities such as rock climbing, carpentry, playing chess, or swimming, researchers said.
TL;DR of TFA: Quit mopping around and go outside and do something..
TSMC already has at least a one-year lead over Intel. Intel's 10nm fab (comparable to TSMC's 7nm fab) won't ramp up until late 2019.
And if Apple abandons Intel for ARM / TSMC, how long will it take for other companies to do the same?
Depends on who can supply them. Apple isn't going to sell its ARM chips to competitors; and until someone makes an ARM chip that is as powerful as an x86 and can run x86 emulation well so existing programs can run out of the box, there will be little reason to dump Intel.
On the other hand the lawyers can't bring the cases all on their own without an injured party
They just need one lead client to represent the class. In this case the three lead clients received $5000 each for doing basically nothing. The lawyers will not have any problem recruiting lead clients.
True. But if a significant number of those in the class opt out then the settlement falls apart. Opting out should be as easy as clicking on a web form instead of having to send back a signed document.
With all the focus on using social media s a political tool and the social media companies' efforts to increase transparency, I understand why the media is interested in seeing how successful those efforts are at achieving their stated goals. however, I think using the name of a real company, even one in receivership, to test the effectiveness is wrong. It asserts an opinion that may or not be the current one of the organization and is, IMHO, fraud. News organizations would be up in arms, and rightly so, if someone claimed to be a reporter and used their name to gain access to information. Imagine the editorials if a politician ran a "Paid for by "Insert News Organization Name" and then said "just testing the filter effectiveness..."
Seriously, the 1st would make it harder to censor since town or city owned community broadband would be subject the 1st; unlike privately owned broadband.
Hmmm. Is there an existing parallel? Why yes, there is. PEG channels (public, education, government) are carried on the local cable TV but run by the government. And yet, those channels have standards for what can appear there. I would like to see someone try to get a half hour program that contains nothing but people saying the word "fuck" onto the government-run public access channel. I'm pretty sure that if a high school student tried the same thing on one of the education channels they'd find themselves in trouble, too.
Seems to fall under existing FCC rules and consistent with obscenity not being protected free speech.
From the FCC:
Franchising authorities may also require cable operators to set aside channels for educational or governmental use on institutional networks, i.e., channels that are generally available only to institutions such as schools, libraries, or government offices.
Franchising authorities may require cable operators to provide services, facilities, or equipment for the use of PEG channels.
In accordance with applicable franchise agreements, local franchising authorities or cable operators may adopt on their own, non-content-based rules governing the use of PEG channels. For example:
Rules may be adopted for allocating time among competing applicants on a reasonable basis other than the content of their programming.
Minimum production standards may be required.
Users may be required to undergo training.
Federal law permitted a cable operator to prohibit the use of a PEG channel for programming that contains obscene material, sexually explicit conduct, indecency, nudity, or material soliciting or promoting unlawful conduct. However, the U.S. Supreme Court determined that this law was unconstitutional. Therefore, cable operators may not control the content of programming on public access channels with the exception that the cable operator may refuse to transmit a public access program, or a portion of the program, which the cable operator reasonably believes contains obscenity.
It's stunning how dishonest this administration has been. I mean, all politicians lie, but none have ever done it with such relish and fervor as the Trump administration, and certainly none has ever come close to the sheer volume of falsehoods. It's a daily torrent of horseshit.
"Community broadband is a threat to the First Amendment" is like saying "Republicans are the ones who want to protect coverage for pre-existing conditions," even though they've voted like 60 times to end coverage for pre-existing conditions.
I guess what surprises me most is that there are so many willing participants, like the FCC, and the GOP caucus in congress and members of the cabinet. They lie and then they laugh at you for buying it.
We are at war with Eastasia. Eurasia is our ally. 2+2=5.
Seriously, the 1st would make it harder to censor since town or city owned community broadband would be subject the 1st; unlike privately owned broadband. Threats to profits, however, are another thing. Follow the money.
What kinds of "issues" are we talking about here. This seems highly subjective since one side's "issue" could be the other side's deal breaker.
Exactly. I am reminded of when AI would replace doctors for diagnosing illnesses. Seems it is helpful in identifying symptoms and possible courses of suctions but humans are still needed to make sense of the information. The real value from lawyers is to explain the legal issues, their ramifications and advise on courses of action. Presenting an argument that the client understands is what is valuable; AI could help with tax by analyzing things and providing in sight. Law firms already use that, they're called associates.
China, being one of the largest sources of spying threats, recommends a specific phone. That they happen to make.
They assure us that they can evesdrop on every other phone, except the one designed & made in their country, with no outside audits.
Sure. We'll get right on that.
Next thing you know they'll offer to give us this big, beautiful horse statue to put on the White House lawn...
It says he uses the phones to talk to old friends, people he was in regular contact with long before he became president. So long as he's not discussing classified information (and he cant be, or there would be a much bigger fuss being made) then whats the problem?
It's not so much specific information but developing a picture of what motivates him, his interests, and what he may be thinking. They are just more pieces inn the puzzle.That provides opportunities to gain an edge in negotiations, learn what buttons to push to get desired results, who to approach on specific topics, etc.
The good (?) news is he apparently doesn't listen to intel briefings so he doesn't have information to reveal.
Actually, it's more complicated. That exemption quoted in the article expired this year and this new law supercedes it.
Thankfully, the original specification language is not present in the car section
Considering the active modding community that adds features, increases performance, allows for repairs it is good they did not limit to original specifications. Repair requirements alone have gotten ridiculous, I mean you need to use a special tool to reset the computer after replacing a battery in a BMW? Thankfully you can buy a tool for. a lot less than the dealer would charge to replace the batteries y and reprogram the computer.
The fact that a librarian needs to provide exemptions to keep the DMCA DRM restrictions reasonable implies that we really should fix the DMCA.
Once again, librarians are the first lien in defense of our freedoms...
an action with has caused a bit of consternation in countries affected by the ruling.
The only reason that has caused consternation is because handing over the data was deemed illegal locally where the data is held.
But not in the location where the order would be entered, so they would be required to turn it over. That's why I think extraterritoriality is a bad thing absent treaties and agreements.
The same protections are not afforded in this case. Google doesn't have a legally protected right to do what it is doing anywhere.
That would depend win contract law and the T&C's both parties agreed to in the contract. Just because something its illegal in one country doesn't make it so in another, and for one court to order a company to take action outside the courts jurisdiction is a dangerous thing.
I'm not sure. US Courts require US based companies to provide records to law enforcement, even if the records are outside the US; an action with has caused a bit of consternation in countries affected by the ruling.
That's a good point, but that's not so much because it requires an action to be done in that country, it's because that action potentially conflicts with the rights of the non-US people whose data is held in those records. There's no such conflict here.
Also a good point, but if Google's T&C's allow them to do that then a court run the EU should not be able to overrule another country's contract law which would violate the rights of companies based there. Portugal's court also requires an action there for Google to not remove the app. I think Google is being shitty but extraterritoriality of a court order is a very slippery, and dangerous slope. Ultimately the ability to do that comes down to which country is more powerful.
It's about protecting the rights of Aptoide, a Portuguese entity, against the actions of Google, a business with a legal presence in Portugal. If Google only violates Aptoide's rights outside Portugal, a Portuguese court can still take action against that: having to respect the rights recognised or granted by a country to its citizens and companies is part of the cost of doing business in that country. If a US-based app store sued Google for the same reason, and a US court ruled that Google had to stop interfering, even outside the US, no, I do not believe there would be any uproar.
I'm not sure. US Courts require US based companies to provide records to law enforcement, even if the records are outside the US; an action with has caused a bit of consternation in countries affected by the ruling. Even in cases where the underlying reason is justifiable, I find the idea that a countries court can enforce actions outside its borders problematic; unless as I pointed out there is some sort of treaty or agreement to so do.
While not the original poster I figured that it would be applicable in the EU but I got lost at the USA and India parts. The article is pretty thin on details and only mentions that it was an EU National court ruling so I fail to see how that makes it applicable in the US or outside of the EU. I am not well versed in EU law so even there I just assume that this ruling would be applicable EU wide but don't know if that is actually the case.
The article said the in junction applies to 82 countries. The court is making an extraterritorial power grab that would have the EU up in arms in a non-EU court tried the same thing. While Google is clearly in the wrong here; allowing a court in one country one region, absent treaty agreements or a union like the EU, is not a good idea.
...what has happened so fundamentally in our country (US) where people don't care about actual citizenship, and protecting our borders?
Better update the Statue of Liberty then "Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free" needs to be replaces with "Fuck You, I got mine, go home brownies".
... and replace the torch with a middle finger. Once aspect of immigration, largely ignored in the debate, is that while in 2013 Central/South America make up about 70% of the group, Asians 15% and Europe / Canada / Africa / etc. the rest. If people started screaming about the 30% as well the argument and dynamics would change.
It would be helpful if articles such as this listed what VLC versions (or other software) have addressed this flaw, rather than just say have the latest updated. From the article the assumption is if you have the Win/OS X/Linux updated to the latest version you are not vulnerable.
I've worked a number of jobs that had expected or mandatory overtime.
When I worked power plant construction, we routinely put in lots of overtime, and were paid very well for it.We worked rotating shifts so you got anywhere between 48 and 120 hours off between shifts. Of course, if they didn't pay and give us some time off they wouldn't had any engineers to build, test, and operate it during construction and startup. We lived on our OT and per diem and banked our salaries.
Later, I worked in plant inspection and while we had not paid OT we got compensatory time off.
As a consultant, I had a target of 2000 billable a year, which was done by long hours during projects followed by weeks on the beach.
In all cases, I was well paid, there were enough breaks to prevent burnout and the work was interesting. Consulting tended too burn people out with the travel and hours so we had a 25% annual turnover rate.
Finance and law are notorious for working new hires long hours and expect many of them will leave; it's a way of getting cheap (relatively) labor and finding out who will stick around and meets their performance standards. As a result, they are always churning through staff.
In the end, some, people will put up with it or even enjoy it while many others will; burn out and leave; adding to a companies hiring costs. For companies that require specialized skills that are harder to find or lots of experience with a particular job that can be a problem and drive wages up.
Actually, an engine strike would probably be less danger. Birds, even large ones, get ingested into engines without catastrophic results due to engine design.
my parents bought me a Panasonic video camera when in on holiday the USA. It broke after a few months. Panasonic in the UK refused to fix it claiming that they were different than Panasonic USA.
They probably are different companies, in that they may all fall under the Panasonic umbrella but are independent entities under a holding company. Panasonic US would have honored the warranty if you shipped it to them. In some cases they my just be a licensee.
The reason is that they charge different amounts in different regions and work hard to preserve that. Multinationals exploit global price differences to their advantage and prevent the consumer from doing likewise.
I will never buy anything from Panasonic in the future -- I'll reward honourable companies (if I can find any).
Part of the reason is different costs due to differing consumer protection laws, warranty durations, etc. Each region factors that into their pricing structure; if they fixed things that were bought elsewhere they would not get the initial revenue that included an allowance for repairs. Some companies honor their warranty worldwide; Apple does IIRC but under the terms of the selling location, so if you buy one in the US you get 1 year, not the additional protections of the EU if you take it to Europe.
Of course, in some cases they simply can charge more because that's what the market will pay and they don't want gray market goods undercutting their sales.
Slashdot Mirror
I think hand writing with a pen or pencil requires much more physical dexterity than smearing your fingers onto a flat surface. Schooling used to require daily hand written exercise for years, even just taking notes for a few minutes each day - I do think it matters.
Beyond that, doing things that require using ones hands to manipulate objects develops skills in so so doing. My coworkers are often surprised I can reach behind a machine and screw in or unscrew items by feel without looking at them.
So playing games while you're worried takes your mind off things? Well gosh. Whoda thunk it? It's almost as if for some people, that's the whole point of video games, avoiding a shitty life by achieving flow in another world where their lives don't suck. I'm glad valuable grant money was spent on such an unexpected outcome that will certainly pave the way for exciting developments. Hey, look at it this way: these results are likely replicable, unlike most of the rest of the "science" produced by the humanities.
Hey, they also discovered other activities that takes your mind off of something is soothing: In place of Tetris, in which blocks are flipped every which way and stacked into rows, one can substitute flow activities such as rock climbing, carpentry, playing chess, or swimming, researchers said.
TL;DR of TFA: Quit mopping around and go outside and do something..
TSMC already has at least a one-year lead over Intel. Intel's 10nm fab (comparable to TSMC's 7nm fab) won't ramp up until late 2019.
And if Apple abandons Intel for ARM / TSMC, how long will it take for other companies to do the same?
Depends on who can supply them. Apple isn't going to sell its ARM chips to competitors; and until someone makes an ARM chip that is as powerful as an x86 and can run x86 emulation well so existing programs can run out of the box, there will be little reason to dump Intel.
On the other hand the lawyers can't bring the cases all on their own without an injured party
They just need one lead client to represent the class. In this case the three lead clients received $5000 each for doing basically nothing. The lawyers will not have any problem recruiting lead clients.
True. But if a significant number of those in the class opt out then the settlement falls apart. Opting out should be as easy as clicking on a web form instead of having to send back a signed document.
With all the focus on using social media s a political tool and the social media companies' efforts to increase transparency, I understand why the media is interested in seeing how successful those efforts are at achieving their stated goals. however, I think using the name of a real company, even one in receivership, to test the effectiveness is wrong. It asserts an opinion that may or not be the current one of the organization and is, IMHO, fraud. News organizations would be up in arms, and rightly so, if someone claimed to be a reporter and used their name to gain access to information. Imagine the editorials if a politician ran a "Paid for by "Insert News Organization Name" and then said "just testing the filter effectiveness..."
Seriously, the 1st would make it harder to censor since town or city owned community broadband would be subject the 1st; unlike privately owned broadband.
Hmmm. Is there an existing parallel? Why yes, there is. PEG channels (public, education, government) are carried on the local cable TV but run by the government. And yet, those channels have standards for what can appear there. I would like to see someone try to get a half hour program that contains nothing but people saying the word "fuck" onto the government-run public access channel. I'm pretty sure that if a high school student tried the same thing on one of the education channels they'd find themselves in trouble, too.
Seems to fall under existing FCC rules and consistent with obscenity not being protected free speech.
From the FCC:
Franchising authorities may also require cable operators to set aside channels for educational or governmental use on institutional networks, i.e., channels that are generally available only to institutions such as schools, libraries, or government offices. Franchising authorities may require cable operators to provide services, facilities, or equipment for the use of PEG channels.
In accordance with applicable franchise agreements, local franchising authorities or cable operators may adopt on their own, non-content-based rules governing the use of PEG channels. For example:
Rules may be adopted for allocating time among competing applicants on a reasonable basis other than the content of their programming.
Minimum production standards may be required.
Users may be required to undergo training.
Federal law permitted a cable operator to prohibit the use of a PEG channel for programming that contains obscene material, sexually explicit conduct, indecency, nudity, or material soliciting or promoting unlawful conduct. However, the U.S. Supreme Court determined that this law was unconstitutional. Therefore, cable operators may not control the content of programming on public access channels with the exception that the cable operator may refuse to transmit a public access program, or a portion of the program, which the cable operator reasonably believes contains obscenity.
I am altering the deal, pray I don't alter it any further.
Foxconn knows, once they have promised jobs, that the governor will try to salvage the deal to avoid being accused of chasing jobs out of Wisconsin.
Meanwhile, the governor screams: Look, over there, a unicorn...
Facts no longer matter...
2+2=5
What kind of fucking morons do these ass clowns think we are? Is that the intelligence level they expect to deal with?
Look at who America elected...
It's stunning how dishonest this administration has been. I mean, all politicians lie, but none have ever done it with such relish and fervor as the Trump administration, and certainly none has ever come close to the sheer volume of falsehoods. It's a daily torrent of horseshit.
"Community broadband is a threat to the First Amendment" is like saying "Republicans are the ones who want to protect coverage for pre-existing conditions," even though they've voted like 60 times to end coverage for pre-existing conditions.
I guess what surprises me most is that there are so many willing participants, like the FCC, and the GOP caucus in congress and members of the cabinet. They lie and then they laugh at you for buying it.
We are at war with Eastasia. Eurasia is our ally. 2+2=5.
Seriously, the 1st would make it harder to censor since town or city owned community broadband would be subject the 1st; unlike privately owned broadband. Threats to profits, however, are another thing. Follow the money.
To steal a line from Oregon.
What kinds of "issues" are we talking about here. This seems highly subjective since one side's "issue" could be the other side's deal breaker.
Exactly. I am reminded of when AI would replace doctors for diagnosing illnesses. Seems it is helpful in identifying symptoms and possible courses of suctions but humans are still needed to make sense of the information. The real value from lawyers is to explain the legal issues, their ramifications and advise on courses of action. Presenting an argument that the client understands is what is valuable; AI could help with tax by analyzing things and providing in sight. Law firms already use that, they're called associates.
What is old is new again...
China, being one of the largest sources of spying threats, recommends a specific phone. That they happen to make. They assure us that they can evesdrop on every other phone, except the one designed & made in their country, with no outside audits.
Sure. We'll get right on that.
Next thing you know they'll offer to give us this big, beautiful horse statue to put on the White House lawn...
It says he uses the phones to talk to old friends, people he was in regular contact with long before he became president. So long as he's not discussing classified information (and he cant be, or there would be a much bigger fuss being made) then whats the problem?
It's not so much specific information but developing a picture of what motivates him, his interests, and what he may be thinking. They are just more pieces inn the puzzle.That provides opportunities to gain an edge in negotiations, learn what buttons to push to get desired results, who to approach on specific topics, etc.
The good (?) news is he apparently doesn't listen to intel briefings so he doesn't have information to reveal.
Actually, it's more complicated. That exemption quoted in the article expired this year and this new law supercedes it. Thankfully, the original specification language is not present in the car section
Considering the active modding community that adds features, increases performance, allows for repairs it is good they did not limit to original specifications. Repair requirements alone have gotten ridiculous, I mean you need to use a special tool to reset the computer after replacing a battery in a BMW? Thankfully you can buy a tool for. a lot less than the dealer would charge to replace the batteries y and reprogram the computer.
The fact that a librarian needs to provide exemptions to keep the DMCA DRM restrictions reasonable implies that we really should fix the DMCA.
Once again, librarians are the first lien in defense of our freedoms...
an action with has caused a bit of consternation in countries affected by the ruling.
The only reason that has caused consternation is because handing over the data was deemed illegal locally where the data is held.
But not in the location where the order would be entered, so they would be required to turn it over. That's why I think extraterritoriality is a bad thing absent treaties and agreements.
The same protections are not afforded in this case. Google doesn't have a legally protected right to do what it is doing anywhere.
That would depend win contract law and the T&C's both parties agreed to in the contract. Just because something its illegal in one country doesn't make it so in another, and for one court to order a company to take action outside the courts jurisdiction is a dangerous thing.
That's a good point, but that's not so much because it requires an action to be done in that country, it's because that action potentially conflicts with the rights of the non-US people whose data is held in those records. There's no such conflict here.
Also a good point, but if Google's T&C's allow them to do that then a court run the EU should not be able to overrule another country's contract law which would violate the rights of companies based there. Portugal's court also requires an action there for Google to not remove the app. I think Google is being shitty but extraterritoriality of a court order is a very slippery, and dangerous slope. Ultimately the ability to do that comes down to which country is more powerful.
It's about protecting the rights of Aptoide, a Portuguese entity, against the actions of Google, a business with a legal presence in Portugal. If Google only violates Aptoide's rights outside Portugal, a Portuguese court can still take action against that: having to respect the rights recognised or granted by a country to its citizens and companies is part of the cost of doing business in that country. If a US-based app store sued Google for the same reason, and a US court ruled that Google had to stop interfering, even outside the US, no, I do not believe there would be any uproar.
I'm not sure. US Courts require US based companies to provide records to law enforcement, even if the records are outside the US; an action with has caused a bit of consternation in countries affected by the ruling. Even in cases where the underlying reason is justifiable, I find the idea that a countries court can enforce actions outside its borders problematic; unless as I pointed out there is some sort of treaty or agreement to so do.
While not the original poster I figured that it would be applicable in the EU but I got lost at the USA and India parts. The article is pretty thin on details and only mentions that it was an EU National court ruling so I fail to see how that makes it applicable in the US or outside of the EU. I am not well versed in EU law so even there I just assume that this ruling would be applicable EU wide but don't know if that is actually the case.
The article said the in junction applies to 82 countries. The court is making an extraterritorial power grab that would have the EU up in arms in a non-EU court tried the same thing. While Google is clearly in the wrong here; allowing a court in one country one region, absent treaty agreements or a union like the EU, is not a good idea.
...what has happened so fundamentally in our country (US) where people don't care about actual citizenship, and protecting our borders?
Better update the Statue of Liberty then "Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free" needs to be replaces with "Fuck You, I got mine, go home brownies".
... and replace the torch with a middle finger. Once aspect of immigration, largely ignored in the debate, is that while in 2013 Central/South America make up about 70% of the group, Asians 15% and Europe / Canada / Africa / etc. the rest. If people started screaming about the 30% as well the argument and dynamics would change.
Source: https://www.migrationpolicy.or...
It would be helpful if articles such as this listed what VLC versions (or other software) have addressed this flaw, rather than just say have the latest updated. From the article the assumption is if you have the Win/OS X/Linux updated to the latest version you are not vulnerable.
I've worked a number of jobs that had expected or mandatory overtime.
When I worked power plant construction, we routinely put in lots of overtime, and were paid very well for it.We worked rotating shifts so you got anywhere between 48 and 120 hours off between shifts. Of course, if they didn't pay and give us some time off they wouldn't had any engineers to build, test, and operate it during construction and startup. We lived on our OT and per diem and banked our salaries.
Later, I worked in plant inspection and while we had not paid OT we got compensatory time off.
As a consultant, I had a target of 2000 billable a year, which was done by long hours during projects followed by weeks on the beach.
In all cases, I was well paid, there were enough breaks to prevent burnout and the work was interesting. Consulting tended too burn people out with the travel and hours so we had a 25% annual turnover rate.
Finance and law are notorious for working new hires long hours and expect many of them will leave; it's a way of getting cheap (relatively) labor and finding out who will stick around and meets their performance standards. As a result, they are always churning through staff.
In the end, some, people will put up with it or even enjoy it while many others will; burn out and leave; adding to a companies hiring costs. For companies that require specialized skills that are harder to find or lots of experience with a particular job that can be a problem and drive wages up.
Interesting video. Thanks.
It looks like the blade fragments are still retained within the cowl, is that the case in the simulation?
If that is the case, while you would loose an engine that would not be catastrophic but just another engine failure in flight.
Actually, an engine strike would probably be less danger. Birds, even large ones, get ingested into engines without catastrophic results due to engine design.
my parents bought me a Panasonic video camera when in on holiday the USA. It broke after a few months. Panasonic in the UK refused to fix it claiming that they were different than Panasonic USA.
They probably are different companies, in that they may all fall under the Panasonic umbrella but are independent entities under a holding company. Panasonic US would have honored the warranty if you shipped it to them. In some cases they my just be a licensee.
The reason is that they charge different amounts in different regions and work hard to preserve that. Multinationals exploit global price differences to their advantage and prevent the consumer from doing likewise.
I will never buy anything from Panasonic in the future -- I'll reward honourable companies (if I can find any).
Part of the reason is different costs due to differing consumer protection laws, warranty durations, etc. Each region factors that into their pricing structure; if they fixed things that were bought elsewhere they would not get the initial revenue that included an allowance for repairs. Some companies honor their warranty worldwide; Apple does IIRC but under the terms of the selling location, so if you buy one in the US you get 1 year, not the additional protections of the EU if you take it to Europe.
Of course, in some cases they simply can charge more because that's what the market will pay and they don't want gray market goods undercutting their sales.