Another side effect of the cost has been the challenge to make use of older fabs. For many companies these older fabs are useful for producing designs for unique markets, such as embedded processors, flash memory, and microcontrollers. However for companies with more limited product lines, it's often best to either rent out the fab, or close it entirely. This is due to the tendency of the cost of upgrading an existing fab to produce devices requiring newer technology to exceed the cost of a completely new fab. So it sounds like the second hand obsolete market for fab equipment is a real steal.. and with the industry moving to 300mm wafer sizes soon..........
That is to say, this is a case of your ISP using packet modification to insert code into your HTTP stream, but it doesn't have to be so innocuous. It's quite possible that someone who has hacked into your ISP could do the same thing.. and not just to HTTP streams, but any TCP stream. Downloaded any executables lately? Its quite possible that a hacker could have intercepted any packet that begins with "MZ", has a non-zero value at offset 0x3c which contains a 4 byte offset into the packet that has "PE" at it. There's a windows binary, let's change the bytes at the entrypoint to do something malicious.
Umm.. a boycott is where you stop buying a particular product to make a political point. Doesn't mean you have to stop enjoying it.. you just gotta stop paying for it.
The founders of the Massachusetts Bay Colony also understood the danger of monopolies and decreed that of these none would be granted by government and those which arose naturally would be challenged and restricted by government. Unfortunately, they let their ideology slip and permitted 7 year long patents to be granted to encourage knowledgeable workers to immigrate to the colony. Many took up the offer and after using their 7 year long monopoly to establish themselves in the community, they fought to have their patents extended to 14 years.. then they started filing the same patent twice but with slight improvements.. the came copyright.. then came patent on all sorts of things, so many of which were hard to validate.. then the patent office dropped the requirements for working prototypes.. then the copyright office dropped the requirement for copyright registration.. then copyright terms got extended.. then they got extended again.. etc, etc.
"Slippery slope" is such a nice way to describe it.
Most of the CO2 in atmosphere comes from oil and coal Wow, I see Gore has really been doing his work well.
Actually, oil and coal account for 36% and 35% of the anthropogenic greenhouse gases, with another 20% from natural gas. The rest is made up from a number of different sources including cement production. It is believed that since the beginning of the industrial revolution the atmospheric CO2 levels have risen from 280 ppm to 380 ppm (parts per million).
You are kidding right? Everyone who gets dismissed from a reasonably high paying job in the USA is required, by their insurance company, to file a grievance. That's how the "income protection" scam works. From the customer's point of view you're just paying a premium to ensure you'll be able to meet your mortgage repayments should you lose your job. From the insurers point of view you're paying for your legal fees in advance so they can reclaim your future mortgage repayments from your employer.
Each of those five things you mentioned are absolutely gold for an unfair dismissal lawsuit. All they have to do is show the slightest amount of impropriety in the workplace and they'll win.
Which reminds me, I really should go get some income insurance.:)
Yeah, makes me wonder how many cases of "oops we broke the law" have been exposed by email trails. If the matter is handled well, and this can be shown to the court, the person suing may well get less money than if there had not been an email trail and the court/jury had to just assume the worst. Of course, in a perfect world, it wouldn't be possible to accidentally break the law.. but we live in a society where most everyone has broken one law or another.
If it's off the record, don't write it. Pick up the phone or better yet, walk over. Don't hit the send button in the heat of anger. Or here's an idea.. don't be a backstabbing two faced liar. Office politics is one of the many reasons why I am happy to work from home more often than not. If you're getting angry about someone go have it out with them. If you're getting all steamed up about decisions made by others, remember your place, get over it, or stop being so serious - it's just a job.
My personal favorite is the few times I've had to voice concern over the possible legal implications of a particular action. I've had people IM or call me instead of replying to emails because they don't want to be "on the record". To which I have said in the past: "oh, don't you know the IM is logged?" or "You know, if you don't reply to my email and clear this up than all that will be 'on the record' is my concerns and none of your explanations."
Of course, there are people who think its okay to break the law, just so long as no-one finds out about it. To those people I don't send email - I send it direct to the CEO.
Ahh. For a minute there I thought you were going to say "that the damage is done" because the CO2 levels in our atmosphere have risen and we're doing nothing to lower them. Switching to nuclear will help reduce the rate at which we are increasing CO2 levels but it still does nothing to reduce the actual CO2 levels. For that particular problem we've had very few realistic solutions proposed. The best one is: plant more trees. Which is great and all, except that people tend to cut trees down and burn them after a certain time, which will release all the CO2 back to the atmosphere. Oh, and trees don't actually fix carbon dioxide in very fast amounts.. so its probably unworkable anyway.
And yes, I don't actually know if any of this stuff is good science or not.. it's widely debated.
Unless you're using the outmoded four-clause or "advertising clause" BSD license, the BSD style licenses will not give you credit for your work.. although I suppose someone could consider a footnote in the documentation to be "credit", but its legal purpose is to ensure that people who distribute the software pass along the disclaimer.
Meh. The BSD style licenses only exist because people are still paranoid about being sued for "defective software". Which is basically what the BSD style licenses protect the author from. To paraphrase: do whatever the hell you want with this code, just don't sue me. Which is funny of course, because what was questionably possible back when free distribution of software was young and worthy of significant worry is absolutely not the case now. If someone tried to sue you for providing them with defective software, for free, they would be laughed out of court.
You didn't question anything. You claimed I said you were going to get sued for X, Y and Z and then went on about how wrong I was.
My point is that if someone wants to sue you for infringing your copyright and you think "Ha! Fair use allows me to do what I did!" then you better think again cause they can still sue you and you can still end up being bankrupted by the time you've proven that fair use is an adequate defense. Then you can happily try to find a "no will no pay" lawyer to recover some of your legal costs.. at which point you'll discover that you can't.
Which is why, if you ever get a cease and desist letter, feel free to ignore it at first, but if you get a second one, or a call from a lawyer or summons to appear in court, do whatever the hell you can to settle cause you can not afford to play the game.
Well so what? If it's fair use it can be defended. haw haw haw.. It costs money to defend fair use. It is always cheaper to just go silently into the night.
Maybe if there was some kind of legal fund for defending fair use that you could dip into, you might have a chance.
I'm willing to bet there were other reasons for this project. Gee, ya think. I wonder how a multinational group of companies that grew out of a core competency of factory automation could possibly make use of advancing robot technology.
Do westerners have any idea how stupid they sound every time someone says "Toyota" and they immediately think "cars". There's 37 companies in the Toyota group. Less than a third of them are auto related. Toyota Industries Corporation, the member from which the group takes its name, was originally called Toyoda Automatic Loom Works, Ltd. If there has to be one thing you think about when someone says "Toyota" then let it be automation. That's what they do. That's what they've always done. Cars just happen to be a product that they export to the little part of the world where you live.
So yeah, when you scratch your head and say "wow, what's Toyota interested in robots for, don't they make cars?!?!" Imagine a little Japanese man laughing at you.
As I write this there are 3 replies to your comment modded up but none of them seem to mention that obvious (I hope) fact that programming this robot to play the violin has absolutely nothing to do with matching the musical abilities of humans. Toyota are not demonstrating a product here. They're not saying "in stores next fall: robots that can play violins". They don't think there's a huge market for violin playing robots out there that is just waiting to be tapped.
The point of this demonstration is to show that their robot research has reached a point where they have built a robot with joints that have sufficient degrees of freedom and controllable accuracy that they can do this kind of stunt. You're supposed to look at a robot playing the violin and say "well, if it can play the violin then it can hold a power drill or other tools!"
I'd suggest that maybe they should program the robot to put together some of the crappy furniture you get from Ikea but then people will claim it wasn't cost effective to use a billion dollar robot to do the work of a home handy man or something.
Slashdot Mirror
That is to say, this is a case of your ISP using packet modification to insert code into your HTTP stream, but it doesn't have to be so innocuous. It's quite possible that someone who has hacked into your ISP could do the same thing.. and not just to HTTP streams, but any TCP stream. Downloaded any executables lately? Its quite possible that a hacker could have intercepted any packet that begins with "MZ", has a non-zero value at offset 0x3c which contains a 4 byte offset into the packet that has "PE" at it. There's a windows binary, let's change the bytes at the entrypoint to do something malicious.
SSL is your friend.
If only we could get IPSEC happening.
Umm.. a boycott is where you stop buying a particular product to make a political point. Doesn't mean you have to stop enjoying it.. you just gotta stop paying for it.
The founders of the Massachusetts Bay Colony also understood the danger of monopolies and decreed that of these none would be granted by government and those which arose naturally would be challenged and restricted by government. Unfortunately, they let their ideology slip and permitted 7 year long patents to be granted to encourage knowledgeable workers to immigrate to the colony. Many took up the offer and after using their 7 year long monopoly to establish themselves in the community, they fought to have their patents extended to 14 years.. then they started filing the same patent twice but with slight improvements.. the came copyright.. then came patent on all sorts of things, so many of which were hard to validate.. then the patent office dropped the requirements for working prototypes.. then the copyright office dropped the requirement for copyright registration.. then copyright terms got extended.. then they got extended again.. etc, etc.
"Slippery slope" is such a nice way to describe it.
Actually, oil and coal account for 36% and 35% of the anthropogenic greenhouse gases, with another 20% from natural gas. The rest is made up from a number of different sources including cement production. It is believed that since the beginning of the industrial revolution the atmospheric CO2 levels have risen from 280 ppm to 380 ppm (parts per million).
You are kidding right? Everyone who gets dismissed from a reasonably high paying job in the USA is required, by their insurance company, to file a grievance. That's how the "income protection" scam works. From the customer's point of view you're just paying a premium to ensure you'll be able to meet your mortgage repayments should you lose your job. From the insurers point of view you're paying for your legal fees in advance so they can reclaim your future mortgage repayments from your employer.
:)
Each of those five things you mentioned are absolutely gold for an unfair dismissal lawsuit. All they have to do is show the slightest amount of impropriety in the workplace and they'll win.
Which reminds me, I really should go get some income insurance.
Yeah, makes me wonder how many cases of "oops we broke the law" have been exposed by email trails. If the matter is handled well, and this can be shown to the court, the person suing may well get less money than if there had not been an email trail and the court/jury had to just assume the worst. Of course, in a perfect world, it wouldn't be possible to accidentally break the law.. but we live in a society where most everyone has broken one law or another.
Old people use email.
Old people have jobs in corporations.
The article is about corporate email.
Do the freakin' math.
My personal favorite is the few times I've had to voice concern over the possible legal implications of a particular action. I've had people IM or call me instead of replying to emails because they don't want to be "on the record". To which I have said in the past: "oh, don't you know the IM is logged?" or "You know, if you don't reply to my email and clear this up than all that will be 'on the record' is my concerns and none of your explanations."
Of course, there are people who think its okay to break the law, just so long as no-one finds out about it. To those people I don't send email - I send it direct to the CEO.
You're right. Unfortunately it will take tens of thousands of years.
See:
http://geosci.uchicago.edu/~archer/reprints/archer.2005.fate_co2.pdf
http://www.ipsl.jussieu.fr/~jomce/acidification/paper/Caldeira_Wickett_2005_JGR.pdf
And yes, of course, as always, these studies are under debate.
Ahh. For a minute there I thought you were going to say "that the damage is done" because the CO2 levels in our atmosphere have risen and we're doing nothing to lower them. Switching to nuclear will help reduce the rate at which we are increasing CO2 levels but it still does nothing to reduce the actual CO2 levels. For that particular problem we've had very few realistic solutions proposed. The best one is: plant more trees. Which is great and all, except that people tend to cut trees down and burn them after a certain time, which will release all the CO2 back to the atmosphere. Oh, and trees don't actually fix carbon dioxide in very fast amounts.. so its probably unworkable anyway.
And yes, I don't actually know if any of this stuff is good science or not.. it's widely debated.
Unless you're using the outmoded four-clause or "advertising clause" BSD license, the BSD style licenses will not give you credit for your work.. although I suppose someone could consider a footnote in the documentation to be "credit", but its legal purpose is to ensure that people who distribute the software pass along the disclaimer.
Meh. The BSD style licenses only exist because people are still paranoid about being sued for "defective software". Which is basically what the BSD style licenses protect the author from. To paraphrase: do whatever the hell you want with this code, just don't sue me. Which is funny of course, because what was questionably possible back when free distribution of software was young and worthy of significant worry is absolutely not the case now. If someone tried to sue you for providing them with defective software, for free, they would be laughed out of court.
I said if you were sued. Otherwise it is just pointless talking about the fair use defense isn't it?
You didn't question anything. You claimed I said you were going to get sued for X, Y and Z and then went on about how wrong I was.
My point is that if someone wants to sue you for infringing your copyright and you think "Ha! Fair use allows me to do what I did!" then you better think again cause they can still sue you and you can still end up being bankrupted by the time you've proven that fair use is an adequate defense. Then you can happily try to find a "no will no pay" lawyer to recover some of your legal costs.. at which point you'll discover that you can't.
Which is why, if you ever get a cease and desist letter, feel free to ignore it at first, but if you get a second one, or a call from a lawyer or summons to appear in court, do whatever the hell you can to settle cause you can not afford to play the game.
So you're saying they can't count to a hundred. Well then, that's different.
what kind of idiots you are hiring to work in surgery who can't even count.
Every thing you said I said which I didn't and then your indignant reply to yourself.
Yes, and its a week I could have spent reading something a worthwhile.
You're an idiot.
Go take a chill pill.
Maybe if there was some kind of legal fund for defending fair use that you could dip into, you might have a chance.
Do westerners have any idea how stupid they sound every time someone says "Toyota" and they immediately think "cars". There's 37 companies in the Toyota group. Less than a third of them are auto related. Toyota Industries Corporation, the member from which the group takes its name, was originally called Toyoda Automatic Loom Works, Ltd. If there has to be one thing you think about when someone says "Toyota" then let it be automation. That's what they do. That's what they've always done. Cars just happen to be a product that they export to the little part of the world where you live.
So yeah, when you scratch your head and say "wow, what's Toyota interested in robots for, don't they make cars?!?!" Imagine a little Japanese man laughing at you.
As I write this there are 3 replies to your comment modded up but none of them seem to mention that obvious (I hope) fact that programming this robot to play the violin has absolutely nothing to do with matching the musical abilities of humans. Toyota are not demonstrating a product here. They're not saying "in stores next fall: robots that can play violins". They don't think there's a huge market for violin playing robots out there that is just waiting to be tapped.
The point of this demonstration is to show that their robot research has reached a point where they have built a robot with joints that have sufficient degrees of freedom and controllable accuracy that they can do this kind of stunt. You're supposed to look at a robot playing the violin and say "well, if it can play the violin then it can hold a power drill or other tools!"
I'd suggest that maybe they should program the robot to put together some of the crappy furniture you get from Ikea but then people will claim it wasn't cost effective to use a billion dollar robot to do the work of a home handy man or something.