Yes, it does. As both the literal and most popular interpretation of the phrase, you can't really argue that it's wrong (at least, not without looking like an idiot).
Of course you can. Because an error becomes widespread doesn't make it right. The unambiguous phrase "suggests the question" is available for the meaning you want.
Also, despite your claim that a "literal" interpretation of "begs the question" means "suggests...", I fail to see that. Perhaps you can explain how one "begs a question"? If it was "begs one to ask the question", perhaps. Maybe you don't care that the subject and object of "begs" are reversed in your interpretation (that's where the "grammar nazism" is relevant, by the way), but it does mean that a "literal" reading of the phrase does not mean what you think it does.
Despite being "broken", in this case, sha1 would be acceptable.
To explain this to a court, you're going to be paying a fortune in legal fees and expert testimony for days of technical argument that will be incomprehensible to the judge and jury, and possibly leave them in doubt as to if this is really guaranteed to be the original data. A printout, signed in ink, leaves much less room to argue, no matter how inelegant. Use your digitally signed data for your internal purposes, the dumb printout for legal.
So if it's only likely to be needed once, why is it a problem to take a few hours to rerieve it? We're talking about accouting records of years gone by, not Jack-Bauer-lives-at-stake urgency.
Wouldn't work in Australia, compliance penalties apply if you can't dredge up the data within a specified period of time.
Within a day at most, I'd think. Anyway, you'd have your "ordinary" file copies to make reference to immediately, you'd only have to dig up the papr record to verify it.
How often would that actually occur? Only in case of company meltdown, a la Enron?
Connect a line printer to mirror the log file as it's created.
Use continuous fanfold paper. Get staff to sign and date first and last page.
Lawyers love paper. (A magistate once asked me if a printout I presented in a case was an "original email". I said it was as close as you could get.) In all likelihood, no one will ever refer to it, so don't worry about that it might take 10 minutes to find a page. Once a month, ship it to a secure storage. For real paranoia, have two printers making two simultaneous copies.
An office full of ozone is definitely bad news - and every LaserJet 4 or 5 I've seen over the past few years has been one of these 'gross polluters'.
Actually, the LJ 4 and later don't emit ozone at all.
HP LaserJet and HP Color LaserJet Series Printers - Information about
Ozone Emissions
The HP LaserJet IIP, IIP Plus, and IIIP series printers generate ozone emissions far
below 0.1 parts per million while printing. The HP LaserJet IIISi, 4, and 4M series printers do not emit ozone at any time. The reason is that none of these printers have corona wires.
I wouldn't bring several bags with me to a movie theatre, and definitely not put anything in the bags that I wouldn't want people to see.
Her two daughters' bags were also searched. And many people go to the cinema after a day of shopping or doing other things, they don't expect to have all their private possessions (women often have extremely personal items in their purses) and purchases spread out on a table for everyone to see.
My wife is pretty parsimonious, so she frowns on extravagances like air conditioning except when we have guests. It is healthier, I believe, as well as cheaper. But not for hardware, I'm sure the heat reduces the life of my PC components. I remember the freezing server rooms at university....
I don't have any heating bill, I live in the tropics. In summer I have a fan on most of the time I'm at the computer, so that's unchanged. Besides, the PC itself sucks down much more power and spews out more heat than the monitor.
If you compare the energy consumption of CRTs and LCDs in everyday use, you'll find astounding results. Or perhaps not so astounding, as the CRT is sucking 150W or more, while your LCD consumes less than 40W - or 60W if you've got a larger screen.
Now you know why many companies are throwing out / have thrown out long ago their CRTs and why it's dumb to pick them up for even less than 10 dollars: larger CRTs may be cheap to buy, but they eat into your wallet through 2-3 years.
Using your figures, the difference in energy use = 10 h * 100 W = 1 kWh/day.
My cost of power = 11c/kWh.
In one year, say 300 work days, 300 * 11c = $33.
To break even on a $200 LCD monitor, it has to last at least 6 years.
So no, it's not "dumb" to use a CRT monitor, when it costs almost nothing to buy or replace, and gives a better image than all but the most expensive LCD monitors. Also, nice sexy LCD monitors are a prime target for burglars. No one is going break in to lug my 35 lb monitor out a window.
I save ten times more energy by taking off my shirt and turning off the airconditioner in the summer months.
The vast majority of people run LCD monitors these days.
No they don't. The majority of monitors sold surely, but monitors last for many years. Mine is over 10 years old, and has survived three or four PCs. There are a lot of old systems and even older monitors in use.
If you buy from Dell (or HP) you know that will be the case. Buy from others and you never know.
If by "others" you mean a name randomly chosen from the Yellow Pages, yes. But if it's a local vendor who you can talk to and check his references, it becomes a much safer proposition, and a lot less hassle than dealing with an enormous company that makes you press a dozen buttons on your phone before you can speak to anyone, who is never the same person who you talked with before and so you have to explain your problem over and over again.
Dozens of people who believed the masts triggered symptoms such as anxiety, nausea and tiredness could not detect if signals were on or off in trials.
That's not the test. People can believe and are in fact poisoned by additives in our food and yet if pressed to detect if a given mean contained additives they wouldn't be able to tell.
The obvious way to conduct such a study would be to correlate the incidence of illness with the proximity to radio sources.
Actually, many studies of illness have been made, and found no correlation with radio wave exposure. But still people complain of "anxiety, nausea and tiredness" and blame it on "radiation". The only real way to measure "anxiety, nausea and tiredness" is to ask people how they feel, which is what this study did.
How did they count the $500m - I bet it was by adding up the retail value of all the software. Probably worth much less than a million at the prices these guys sell at.
TFA said 290,000 CDs. These normally retail for about US$0.50 in China, up to US$3 or $4 sometimes in Hong Kong. So "street value" between $150,000-$800,000 max. Street value is how drug busts are valued, why not software? For the same reason, of course: they choose the larger number to make it sound more dramatic. And Slashdot goes along with this crap and puts this imaginary number in the headline.
Surely the copyright on this recording runs out in June 2012, not 50 years from the issue of Anthology 1?
Probably for that track. But presumably the Anthology versions are remastered, etc., and higher quality. Though that might not be enough to make a new copyright; as cases involving scans of art work have failed to establish copyright IIRC. But the Anthology album is certainly a new work as a whole, as some parts at least had not been released earlier. So people may not mind paying a little more (in 10 years it should be pretty cheap) for the Anthology version rather than a generic re-release of an out-of-copyright recording should that ever come to pass.
All very confused and no doubt intentionally so to deter anyone from trying.
You are assuming that copyright is only about money. It is not.
When Britney Spears wants to cover your 45 year old rock n' roll masterpiece, you want to have a say, don't you?
This story is about the copyright of recordings. The copyright on music and lyrics, what you're talking about, last for 70 years after the composer's death. However, I am not sure that you can refuse to allow someone to cover your song in any case, there are compulsory licensing rights in some situations and you get a statutory payment.
I dunno, if the remaining Beatles survive another 6 years then their early work will be out of copyright in their lifetime.
The RECORDINGS' copyright -- the particular recordings made 50 years ago. Not the copyright of the music and lyrics, which lasts for their lifetime + 70 years. (Though I think thay signed thewm away to the record companies, who later sold them to Micheal Jackson, IIRC.) But in the last 10 years, the "Anthology" and such versions of the old songs will have copyrights until McCartney is 110 or so.
I use Ventura 3 (GEM) every day. Still the most efficient DTP I know. Runs fine under Win 2k and XP, just 1000 times faster than on the original PC-XT it was designed for.
TFA doesn't even try to justify the headline. It's really about the possibility that "low powered", cheap PCs and laptops could satisfy the needs for many users in the West, not just third world countries, and that much of the horsepower of new PCs is unnecessary.
I'd certainly buy an OLPC for my 10-year-old daughter in a minute if I could.
Moore's Law itself is in no danger; in fact it will ensure the OLPC-type machines will inevitably become more powerful themselves, but constrained by cost and power consumption more than "mainstream" machines now.
Slashdot Mirror
That's a joke -- as a definition in Australian (the language, aka Strine).
However, as Crocodile Dundee might say: That's not a typo, "a man tried to reneg" is a typo.
Just kidding. Another stupid typo that a spellcheck would have fixed if the editors could be bothered.
If you suspect that you can change your pin code. Or change them daily if you want to.
I'm sure a mask could be reverse engineered to any given "face code" that would fool a machine, if not a human.
Of course you can. Because an error becomes widespread doesn't make it right. The unambiguous phrase "suggests the question" is available for the meaning you want.
Also, despite your claim that a "literal" interpretation of "begs the question" means "suggests...", I fail to see that. Perhaps you can explain how one "begs a question"? If it was "begs one to ask the question", perhaps. Maybe you don't care that the subject and object of "begs" are reversed in your interpretation (that's where the "grammar nazism" is relevant, by the way), but it does mean that a "literal" reading of the phrase does not mean what you think it does.
To explain this to a court, you're going to be paying a fortune in legal fees and expert testimony for days of technical argument that will be incomprehensible to the judge and jury, and possibly leave them in doubt as to if this is really guaranteed to be the original data. A printout, signed in ink, leaves much less room to argue, no matter how inelegant. Use your digitally signed data for your internal purposes, the dumb printout for legal.
So if it's only likely to be needed once, why is it a problem to take a few hours to rerieve it? We're talking about accouting records of years gone by, not Jack-Bauer-lives-at-stake urgency.
Within a day at most, I'd think. Anyway, you'd have your "ordinary" file copies to make reference to immediately, you'd only have to dig up the papr record to verify it.
How often would that actually occur? Only in case of company meltdown, a la Enron?
Lawyers love paper. (A magistate once asked me if a printout I presented in a case was an "original email". I said it was as close as you could get.) In all likelihood, no one will ever refer to it, so don't worry about that it might take 10 minutes to find a page. Once a month, ship it to a secure storage. For real paranoia, have two printers making two simultaneous copies.
Actually, the LJ 4 and later don't emit ozone at all.
Her two daughters' bags were also searched. And many people go to the cinema after a day of shopping or doing other things, they don't expect to have all their private possessions (women often have extremely personal items in their purses) and purchases spread out on a table for everyone to see.
My wife is pretty parsimonious, so she frowns on extravagances like air conditioning except when we have guests. It is healthier, I believe, as well as cheaper. But not for hardware, I'm sure the heat reduces the life of my PC components. I remember the freezing server rooms at university....
Sometimes 7. I work at home. But I was counting all my time in front of the PC regardless of business/pleasure.
I don't have any heating bill, I live in the tropics. In summer I have a fan on most of the time I'm at the computer, so that's unchanged. Besides, the PC itself sucks down much more power and spews out more heat than the monitor.
Not everyone is that privileged. And please, don't call me a liar.
Using your figures, the difference in energy use = 10 h * 100 W = 1 kWh/day.
My cost of power = 11c/kWh.
In one year, say 300 work days, 300 * 11c = $33.
To break even on a $200 LCD monitor, it has to last at least 6 years.
So no, it's not "dumb" to use a CRT monitor, when it costs almost nothing to buy or replace, and gives a better image than all but the most expensive LCD monitors. Also, nice sexy LCD monitors are a prime target for burglars. No one is going break in to lug my 35 lb monitor out a window.
I save ten times more energy by taking off my shirt and turning off the airconditioner in the summer months.
No they don't. The majority of monitors sold surely, but monitors last for many years. Mine is over 10 years old, and has survived three or four PCs. There are a lot of old systems and even older monitors in use.
If by "others" you mean a name randomly chosen from the Yellow Pages, yes. But if it's a local vendor who you can talk to and check his references, it becomes a much safer proposition, and a lot less hassle than dealing with an enormous company that makes you press a dozen buttons on your phone before you can speak to anyone, who is never the same person who you talked with before and so you have to explain your problem over and over again.
That's not the test. People can believe and are in fact poisoned by additives in our food and yet if pressed to detect if a given mean contained additives they wouldn't be able to tell.
The obvious way to conduct such a study would be to correlate the incidence of illness with the proximity to radio sources.
Actually, many studies of illness have been made, and found no correlation with radio wave exposure. But still people complain of "anxiety, nausea and tiredness" and blame it on "radiation". The only real way to measure "anxiety, nausea and tiredness" is to ask people how they feel, which is what this study did.
There's "room" for 20 additional USB ports on the back of my PC without dropping anything.
TFA said 290,000 CDs. These normally retail for about US$0.50 in China, up to US$3 or $4 sometimes in Hong Kong. So "street value" between $150,000-$800,000 max. Street value is how drug busts are valued, why not software? For the same reason, of course: they choose the larger number to make it sound more dramatic. And Slashdot goes along with this crap and puts this imaginary number in the headline.
Probably for that track. But presumably the Anthology versions are remastered, etc., and higher quality. Though that might not be enough to make a new copyright; as cases involving scans of art work have failed to establish copyright IIRC. But the Anthology album is certainly a new work as a whole, as some parts at least had not been released earlier. So people may not mind paying a little more (in 10 years it should be pretty cheap) for the Anthology version rather than a generic re-release of an out-of-copyright recording should that ever come to pass.
All very confused and no doubt intentionally so to deter anyone from trying.
This story is about the copyright of recordings. The copyright on music and lyrics, what you're talking about, last for 70 years after the composer's death. However, I am not sure that you can refuse to allow someone to cover your song in any case, there are compulsory licensing rights in some situations and you get a statutory payment.
The RECORDINGS' copyright -- the particular recordings made 50 years ago. Not the copyright of the music and lyrics, which lasts for their lifetime + 70 years. (Though I think thay signed thewm away to the record companies, who later sold them to Micheal Jackson, IIRC.) But in the last 10 years, the "Anthology" and such versions of the old songs will have copyrights until McCartney is 110 or so.
I use Ventura 3 (GEM) every day. Still the most efficient DTP I know. Runs fine under Win 2k and XP, just 1000 times faster than on the original PC-XT it was designed for.
I'd certainly buy an OLPC for my 10-year-old daughter in a minute if I could.
Moore's Law itself is in no danger; in fact it will ensure the OLPC-type machines will inevitably become more powerful themselves, but constrained by cost and power consumption more than "mainstream" machines now.