The solution is to elect people who understand and respect our founding principles instead of people who promise us all kinds of new shiny stuff.
That's both the solution, and the problem. Yes we in theory can elect people that will fix the system, but no, we as a people are greedy, short-sighted, narrow-minded voters that will vote in anyone that promises free lollipops after the election, issues be damned, until it gets really bad. That's why our elected officials are voted back and forth on seesaw elections. One election they vote in a candidate for all the shiny stuff he promises because the last guy was too busy trying to solve issues and spending money where it needed to be spent. Then next election they vote the first guy back in because the second one undid all the fixes from the first guy. Rinse and repeat.
I don't blame the politicians or the corporations, I blame the voters. Unfortunately, big business has sat quietly on the sidelines slipping dollars into pockets and actually getting laws passed that serve their good.
Yes but not in the way you think it was. Steve had sufficient trust in the author to authorize it but without placing limits on the content (no questions were "off limits" for example) nor requiring approval on the final form. That requires some combination of bravery and trust between the two.
Isn't there some form of restriction here in the license, are they allowed to make a closed source derivative work, seeing as they're the original authors? What open source license (if any) was Growl formerly using?
I know some licenses require all derivative works to be open source, but I'm definitely not expert on open source licensing.
Just because someone can't find a job doesn't mean that their education is worthless. What it does mean is that they can't find a job specifically tailored for someone with their type of educational background and it also implies that some changes need to be made to the entire education system here in the U.S.
I think another part of the problem though is employers requiring degrees to get a job, or at least making the youth believe they need an expensive piece of paper to get a good job.
I've got what I consider to be a pretty good job. I'm not wealthy, but I'm doing ok on my own. I went to college for several years for compsci, and in my computer-related job I'm using zero of what I learned. Not only did my employer not require the degree, but what I learned in school wasn't even useful. It was basically a waste of time and money.
I feel bad for the grads that have the burden of student loans to pay off when the graduate, I was able to enter the workforce before graduation and get what little debt I'd racked up paid off quickly. I can only imagine how bad it is to be fresh out of school with a huge debt and unable to find a job with that crisp new piece of oh-so-expensive paper in hand. Too many students were under the impression that they could take out that diploma and waive it like a magic wand and have all these fortune-500 companies clamoring to see their application. I think this group may be one of the hardest hit (and yet least recognized) by the recent global economy problems. Five years ago they saw all these wonderful openings in (their field of choice) and expected those jobs to be there when they put on the cap and gown, and it just all evaporated as they were shelling out all that money/dept. What looked like such a good investment turned into a white elephant.
is that we have to sue our own government in an attempt to force them to tell us about the laws they are enforcing against us. That alone indicates a huge problem with the system, regardless of the nature of the laws themselves.
If I could vote in one constitutional amendment right now, it would be "No Secret Laws". That alone would fix a great deal of evil by shining some light into the many dark corners of our government.
when you don't allow users to run your test on some of your competition's offerings, such as Safari.
All they're trying to do is say "We're the best (in this carefully chosen group)" Of course they're going to win that argument. Even a catbox smells nice if you're only allowed to compare it with a hog shed.
Now I'm not out to smear the other offerings they did include, but even leaving out one significant competitor from your test is more than enough to raise reasonable doubt as to how your product really stacks up against all your competition.
in the UK, which this is, the owner is entirely at their liberty to say whether or not you can take a photo.
Not quite. Small difference. They have no right to force you to do or not do something, but they can demand that you leave if you refuse their requests. And they certainly can't demand your property. (such as take your camera) or demand your actions (such as delete photos taken) Short summary: you don't lose any of your rights simply because you're on someone else's property. BUT being ON their property is a privilege, one that they can rescind at any time, for any reason, including breaking their "house rules".
These laws will hopefully be overturned if they ever get infront of the Supreme Court as it seems like a direct violation of the 4th Amendment.
And that's sort of why I see this appeals court decision as a good thing... this opens the path to take it to the SCOTUS. If the appeals court had found in the citizen's favor, it would have merely set a state precedence. Not nearly as applicable as a SCOTUS decision.
I know the SCOTUS's docket is a perpetually flooded thing, and we've seen many instances where they passed on a case not because it lacked merit, but because they didn't want to open up a can of worms, so I'm hoping they take this one on and pass down a decision on it.
This BS of making electronic devices (computers, cell phones, whathaveyou) a complete exception to rules of search is just insane and needs to be stomped down.
That is soooo true. It's not free energy. Walking on those tiles will be like walking on soft ground, their feet will get tired. They better install more benches for people to sit on in the mall, they're going to need them.
And I remember, "back in the day" (1992 or so) when incoming time counted on my cell phone where I had 20 minutes a month, at $0.50 per additional minute over that. (that was an improvement over my starting plan, which was 10 minutes a month, $1.00 each additional !) Wrong numbers got VERY annoying very fast. Apparently a drug dealer or something was giving out my number, got call after call asking for the same person, and every single one of them hung up on me when I tried to get more information about who was giving out my number. Cell company refused to change my number without charging me for it, so me being out of contract by a few months, just changed carriers. (which got me a new number and some other free perks for switching) Funny too, they called me at my home number that afternoon to apologize and offer a free number switch, too late!
Those laws were drafted back when cell phone incoming charges were a big deal, and at the same time they were robofaxing and eating up everyone's toner to boot. Nowadays anyone with a grain of business sense is using a usb faxmodem to pdf to their computer, and the majority of cell phone plans are free-incoming-minutes, so these laws have lost a lot of their justification. I still support them, but they just have less justification backing them now unfortunately.
But yes it still happens. Telemarketing to cell phones has become a lot more difficult to deal with after the number portability thing went into effect - telemarketers can't just scrub area codes anymore to keep the cell phones out of their lists. And my mom's business fax, if she leaves it turned on it will print dozens of pages of ads every day so she can't leave it on. Sure it's illegal but those cutrate sellers could care less about CP laws. I should give her my old faxmodem, my OS doesn't support dialup anymore and my ISP dropped the local dialup line anyway.
He said he would not use the term spontaneous combustion, as there had to be some source of ignition, possibly a lit match or cigarette.
"Spontaneous Combustion" was put in as the title of the article, despite the specific denial of that term by the coronor. That's sensationalism in its most basic form.
That depends entirely on who's controlling the government during that cycle, and who that government decides needs the greater protection, doesn't it?
I'm pretty sure the (US) govt has been in the "controlled by money/business interests" side of the cycle for several decades. I don't think we can call it a "cycle" anymore. More like a "shift in power".
The best way to view these sorts of "terms" is that you can put almost anything in a contract you want to, (with a very limited specific set of exceptions) but that doesn't guarantee they'll be enforceable. But that usually requires a court challenge, and even if it's proven to be unenforceable, it still won't prevent anyone from continuing to include it in their terms. (unless another exception is created for that specific application, which does happen from time to time) Usually the exceptions created require a party to include specific bodies of text in an agreement, affirming that the other party has specific rights. (for the best example, read the fine print in your credit card agreement)
The "best" solution here is to make it an offense to place unlawful waivers of rights in an agreement. But that's unfortunately not likely to happen. (due to the phase of the "cycle" we are stuck in)
FWIW, ostriches don't bury their heads in the sand. They do build nests in depressions they dig in the ground (using their head), and do spend time like any other bird does, shifting their eggs around many times a day (again with their head), which gives an observer the impression that they have their head in the sand.
How this came to be associated with being frightened I haven't a clue. Try to sneak up on a parent ostrich and scare them while they're tending their nest. I can guarantee you they won't keep their head down. (and considering their land top speed of 60mph, you better be within a few feet of your dirt bike or you're going to get a boot to the head)
I remember using that, but the checksum is only one byte, and if the data is fubar in the block and returning slightly different data each time around the head, you'll eventually "get it" (after ~128 attempts, on the average) and still not have the correct data. Been there, done that.
accurately detect human-generated carbon dioxide and ammonia in air that wafted through gaps in the rubble
I'd be willing to bet that there's a number of easier to smell things than CO2 "wafting" up out of rubble with a survivor that's been in there for days.
Lets drop the PC talk and get down to brass tacks. By day 3 any survivor is going to be quite ripe in a number of ways and their bad breath is going to be the last thing you notice.
The problem is, if only say 2% of the people that click Agree actually send that mail, (and that'd be a very optimistic number) then those 2% are the only ones that can engage in a class action suit. And with such small numbers, getting class status will be impossible. And Sony knows this. So there's no point to it, sending that letter is a waste of time unless you are trying to opt out of arbitration instead of class action, and intend to hire a lawyer.
It may simply be something that runs on a parallel level with the main processor, that has access (read/write) to the main system, but that cannot be modified (or even detected) by the main system. Not a bad place for AV software really. But as several have pointed out, it has to allow the user at some point to make changes/updates to it, and that means users will be letting zero-day nasties get into the protected space and then you're hosed good.
When a market is new and fresh and there are still lots of simple but good ideas that haven't been thought of yet, rapid expansion is a good thing. Once the market has matured and all of the easy niches are occupied, you have to turn and focus on what you managed to get a good foot in the door on.
If you keep trying to expand out in every direction you're in trouble. It's a bit like life in a petri dish - when you have the dish all to yourself you can expand all you want and it's great. Once the plate is full you'd better consolidate and become efficient if you want to push out other established competition to make more room in the market for yourself to slowly expand.
I use rsync also and have so for years, but the only feature I miss in my rather obese script is it only keeps one version. More than once I've discovered something went missing or got munged a week ago and the backup has long since mirrored the damage.
I may go to time machine eventually but it doesn't go over the internet and two of my machines must go over the net.
Slashdot Mirror
That's both the solution, and the problem. Yes we in theory can elect people that will fix the system, but no, we as a people are greedy, short-sighted, narrow-minded voters that will vote in anyone that promises free lollipops after the election, issues be damned, until it gets really bad. That's why our elected officials are voted back and forth on seesaw elections. One election they vote in a candidate for all the shiny stuff he promises because the last guy was too busy trying to solve issues and spending money where it needed to be spent. Then next election they vote the first guy back in because the second one undid all the fixes from the first guy. Rinse and repeat.
I don't blame the politicians or the corporations, I blame the voters. Unfortunately, big business has sat quietly on the sidelines slipping dollars into pockets and actually getting laws passed that serve their good.
Yes but not in the way you think it was. Steve had sufficient trust in the author to authorize it but without placing limits on the content (no questions were "off limits" for example) nor requiring approval on the final form. That requires some combination of bravery and trust between the two.
Isn't there some form of restriction here in the license, are they allowed to make a closed source derivative work, seeing as they're the original authors? What open source license (if any) was Growl formerly using?
I know some licenses require all derivative works to be open source, but I'm definitely not expert on open source licensing.
I think another part of the problem though is employers requiring degrees to get a job, or at least making the youth believe they need an expensive piece of paper to get a good job.
I've got what I consider to be a pretty good job. I'm not wealthy, but I'm doing ok on my own. I went to college for several years for compsci, and in my computer-related job I'm using zero of what I learned. Not only did my employer not require the degree, but what I learned in school wasn't even useful. It was basically a waste of time and money.
I feel bad for the grads that have the burden of student loans to pay off when the graduate, I was able to enter the workforce before graduation and get what little debt I'd racked up paid off quickly. I can only imagine how bad it is to be fresh out of school with a huge debt and unable to find a job with that crisp new piece of oh-so-expensive paper in hand. Too many students were under the impression that they could take out that diploma and waive it like a magic wand and have all these fortune-500 companies clamoring to see their application. I think this group may be one of the hardest hit (and yet least recognized) by the recent global economy problems. Five years ago they saw all these wonderful openings in (their field of choice) and expected those jobs to be there when they put on the cap and gown, and it just all evaporated as they were shelling out all that money/dept. What looked like such a good investment turned into a white elephant.
I was thinking more that they might be swimming in it
is that we have to sue our own government in an attempt to force them to tell us about the laws they are enforcing against us. That alone indicates a huge problem with the system, regardless of the nature of the laws themselves.
If I could vote in one constitutional amendment right now, it would be "No Secret Laws". That alone would fix a great deal of evil by shining some light into the many dark corners of our government.
when you don't allow users to run your test on some of your competition's offerings, such as Safari.
All they're trying to do is say "We're the best (in this carefully chosen group)" Of course they're going to win that argument. Even a catbox smells nice if you're only allowed to compare it with a hog shed.
Now I'm not out to smear the other offerings they did include, but even leaving out one significant competitor from your test is more than enough to raise reasonable doubt as to how your product really stacks up against all your competition.
Not quite. Small difference. They have no right to force you to do or not do something, but they can demand that you leave if you refuse their requests. And they certainly can't demand your property. (such as take your camera) or demand your actions (such as delete photos taken) Short summary: you don't lose any of your rights simply because you're on someone else's property. BUT being ON their property is a privilege, one that they can rescind at any time, for any reason, including breaking their "house rules".
And that's sort of why I see this appeals court decision as a good thing... this opens the path to take it to the SCOTUS. If the appeals court had found in the citizen's favor, it would have merely set a state precedence. Not nearly as applicable as a SCOTUS decision.
I know the SCOTUS's docket is a perpetually flooded thing, and we've seen many instances where they passed on a case not because it lacked merit, but because they didn't want to open up a can of worms, so I'm hoping they take this one on and pass down a decision on it.
This BS of making electronic devices (computers, cell phones, whathaveyou) a complete exception to rules of search is just insane and needs to be stomped down.
Oh come on, you can be more creative than that! How about photoshopping in Hitler, George Bush, Big Bird, or your dalmation?
I really don't see why it matters though, the ticket is tied to the license plate, hence the owner of the car, regardless of who's at the wheel.
That is soooo true. It's not free energy. Walking on those tiles will be like walking on soft ground, their feet will get tired. They better install more benches for people to sit on in the mall, they're going to need them.
Not every calling plan has free incoming minutes.
And I remember, "back in the day" (1992 or so) when incoming time counted on my cell phone where I had 20 minutes a month, at $0.50 per additional minute over that. (that was an improvement over my starting plan, which was 10 minutes a month, $1.00 each additional !) Wrong numbers got VERY annoying very fast. Apparently a drug dealer or something was giving out my number, got call after call asking for the same person, and every single one of them hung up on me when I tried to get more information about who was giving out my number. Cell company refused to change my number without charging me for it, so me being out of contract by a few months, just changed carriers. (which got me a new number and some other free perks for switching) Funny too, they called me at my home number that afternoon to apologize and offer a free number switch, too late!
Those laws were drafted back when cell phone incoming charges were a big deal, and at the same time they were robofaxing and eating up everyone's toner to boot. Nowadays anyone with a grain of business sense is using a usb faxmodem to pdf to their computer, and the majority of cell phone plans are free-incoming-minutes, so these laws have lost a lot of their justification. I still support them, but they just have less justification backing them now unfortunately.
But yes it still happens. Telemarketing to cell phones has become a lot more difficult to deal with after the number portability thing went into effect - telemarketers can't just scrub area codes anymore to keep the cell phones out of their lists. And my mom's business fax, if she leaves it turned on it will print dozens of pages of ads every day so she can't leave it on. Sure it's illegal but those cutrate sellers could care less about CP laws. I should give her my old faxmodem, my OS doesn't support dialup anymore and my ISP dropped the local dialup line anyway.
drat. mod pts and no +1 Sarcastic option.
"Spontaneous Combustion" was put in as the title of the article, despite the specific denial of that term by the coronor. That's sensationalism in its most basic form.
I'm pretty sure the (US) govt has been in the "controlled by money/business interests" side of the cycle for several decades. I don't think we can call it a "cycle" anymore. More like a "shift in power".
The best way to view these sorts of "terms" is that you can put almost anything in a contract you want to, (with a very limited specific set of exceptions) but that doesn't guarantee they'll be enforceable. But that usually requires a court challenge, and even if it's proven to be unenforceable, it still won't prevent anyone from continuing to include it in their terms. (unless another exception is created for that specific application, which does happen from time to time) Usually the exceptions created require a party to include specific bodies of text in an agreement, affirming that the other party has specific rights. (for the best example, read the fine print in your credit card agreement)
The "best" solution here is to make it an offense to place unlawful waivers of rights in an agreement. But that's unfortunately not likely to happen. (due to the phase of the "cycle" we are stuck in)
FWIW, ostriches don't bury their heads in the sand. They do build nests in depressions they dig in the ground (using their head), and do spend time like any other bird does, shifting their eggs around many times a day (again with their head), which gives an observer the impression that they have their head in the sand.
How this came to be associated with being frightened I haven't a clue. Try to sneak up on a parent ostrich and scare them while they're tending their nest. I can guarantee you they won't keep their head down. (and considering their land top speed of 60mph, you better be within a few feet of your dirt bike or you're going to get a boot to the head)
I remember using that, but the checksum is only one byte, and if the data is fubar in the block and returning slightly different data each time around the head, you'll eventually "get it" (after ~128 attempts, on the average) and still not have the correct data. Been there, done that.
I'd be willing to bet that there's a number of easier to smell things than CO2 "wafting" up out of rubble with a survivor that's been in there for days.
Lets drop the PC talk and get down to brass tacks. By day 3 any survivor is going to be quite ripe in a number of ways and their bad breath is going to be the last thing you notice.
The problem is, if only say 2% of the people that click Agree actually send that mail, (and that'd be a very optimistic number) then those 2% are the only ones that can engage in a class action suit. And with such small numbers, getting class status will be impossible. And Sony knows this. So there's no point to it, sending that letter is a waste of time unless you are trying to opt out of arbitration instead of class action, and intend to hire a lawyer.
It may simply be something that runs on a parallel level with the main processor, that has access (read/write) to the main system, but that cannot be modified (or even detected) by the main system. Not a bad place for AV software really. But as several have pointed out, it has to allow the user at some point to make changes/updates to it, and that means users will be letting zero-day nasties get into the protected space and then you're hosed good.
When a market is new and fresh and there are still lots of simple but good ideas that haven't been thought of yet, rapid expansion is a good thing. Once the market has matured and all of the easy niches are occupied, you have to turn and focus on what you managed to get a good foot in the door on.
If you keep trying to expand out in every direction you're in trouble. It's a bit like life in a petri dish - when you have the dish all to yourself you can expand all you want and it's great. Once the plate is full you'd better consolidate and become efficient if you want to push out other established competition to make more room in the market for yourself to slowly expand.
This sounded awesome until I was thinking about it...
so does this mean that if a beneficiary invents something cool, they can't patent it, and then intel can?
would be a nice opportunity to set a SCOTUS precedent though....
I use rsync also and have so for years, but the only feature I miss in my rather obese script is it only keeps one version. More than once I've discovered something went missing or got munged a week ago and the backup has long since mirrored the damage.
I may go to time machine eventually but it doesn't go over the internet and two of my machines must go over the net.