No. They might call it "solution of hydrogen chloride (HCl) in water", but they won't call it "water-based", which by definition means that the foundation of the thing is water, because it isn't.
When I googled for "water-based", I got page upon page of hits for things like water-based stains and pigments. That is, substances that could be dissolved in a choice of fluids such as water, alcohol, and oils.
And a hydrochloric acid solution is a substance (anhydrous hydrogen chloride, a gas) dissolved in water.
Yeah, they have a "do not eat" warning on silica gel... one guy read it and starved to death. He was the same guy, I think, who it took six months to get from New York to Florida because of all the signs that said "clean rest rooms ahead".
I'd like to thank him for improving my pissing experience. Once I passed him, things got pretty gross.
Exactly. Are there shithead sales people who oversell and expected engineering to pick up their slack? Of course. Are there shithead engineers that spend more time complaining than developing and are shocked when they don't finish on schedule? Of course.
Sure. And the shithead engineers either get let go or promoted to management. The shithead sales people, on the other hand, get rewarded while engineering gets the whip.
the camera screens have smaller resolutions than the photo so you will need an algorithm to downgrade the image, that part is patentable
Or would be, if downscaling algorithms hadn't been known for decades. Of course, if you write "downscaling...on a mobile device", that's a new patent. Then you can write dependent claims like "method of claim X, where the downscaling is nearest-neighbor interpolation" "method of claim X, where the downscaling is bilinear interpolation" "method of claim X, where different downscaling methods are used on the luma and chroma components" (stop me if you've heard all this before)
Climate change is in there because since the fall of the Soviet Union, no-shit world-ending catastrophe just isn't likely. Putin, the Chinese communist leaders, and Obama are all too busy enjoying wealth and power to blow it all up. Same goes for England and France. The lesser nuclear powers don't have what it takes to destroy the world. So to attempt to regains some relevance for the doomsday clock, they threw climate change in there.
A search of Usenet reveals the Atari Jaguar had a unit called a "GPU" in 1993, considerably before NVIDIA's "first GPU" in 1999. The Amiga unit was also called a GPU.
The term's generic, and NVIDIA knows it... they don't have it registered as a trademark.
Meanwhile across town at the habitat for humanity reuse center (and this like 5 min away,... small town) they were selling 2ghz p4 pizza boxes for 5 bucks each, and they sat there for months.
Sounds like you missed an arbitrage opportunity. Buy 20 for $5, sell for $100 each on Craigslist.
I mean, seriously, what's the inventive step here? Navigation has been around a long time. Navigation based on various user-entered constraints has been around a long time (look at the truck navigation systems, where you can enter type of vehicle and any hazmats you're carrying). Navigation for pedestians has been around for a while (see Google Maps). So what's changed, they've added a few more constraints?
Who profits by muddied waters? Wasn't this all figured out decades ago when employees got home telephones and occasionally talked business on them?
Home telephones don't store data (except the occasional phone number), so smartphones add a new aspect.
The Uniform Trade Secret Act (UTSA) is pretty much silent on what constitutes "efforts that are reasonable under the circumstances to maintain its secrecy", so there's plenty of room for muddied waters there.
I had thought that internal combustion engines worked at peak efficiency when at open throttle.
Maximum efficiency on modern cars is just short of WOT, as ECUs are programmed to enrich the mixture at WOT, and may go open-loop. So you want to open it just short of the point where power enrichment kicks in.
Indeed. It's our weird world of thinking -> "We won't build new nuclear power plants (which are safer, and benefit from technology advances), because nuclear power is unsafe; but we will continue to operate the older nuclear power plants (which are less safe, and are slowly crumbling) because we have already spent the money building them."
If you won't build the new ones, won't continue running the old ones, and can't or won't build enough conventional capacity to take up the slack, what are you going to do, go back to living in the dark?
you submit on the spot to anything they say then you protest afterwards through legislative means. and make noise in the media
This is the "white hat" answer you'll always get, but it doesn't work. Once you've submitted and the confrontation is over, your protests will simply fall on deaf ears. You submitted, you're not a problem, you can't even make noise any more.
A big chunk of First Amendment philosophy stems from a case concerning people protesting the military draft -- the WWI (one!) military draft.
And the ruling of that case -- Schenck v. US -- is that a law prohibiting distributing pamphlets claiming that the draft was unconstitutional was not unconstitutional, as such pamphlets were a clear and present danger to the United States.
Not a high point in First Amendment jurisprudence by any means. Burn in hell, Oliver Wendell Holmes.
You mean kakistocracy, i.e. government by the worst people. Kakistodemocracy isn't an English word.
"Rotational kakistodemocracy" is a recent coinage. I'm not sure what the author coining it meant, but what I mean by it is "government by one of a number of sets of the worst people around, the choice of which of those sets of worst people being determined by popular vote, and the choice occasionally changing."
I thought the excuse for toll highways in the US was to pay for the maintenance of those stretches of highway. If the gas taxes are supposed to pay for the maintenance, what's the purpose of the tolls? Straight out gouging of a captive market?
Gas taxes are diverted to mass transit, among other things. Tolls are diverted to all sorts of boondoggles. Americans buy SUVs to handle the resulting potholes.
Yeah, with two caveats. 1) That assumes you have a job. Lots of unemployed IT people and IT people working in other professions aren't counted. 2) A lot of these jobs are in high cost of living areas like New York City or Silicon Valley. When a 1BR apartment costs north of $2000/month, $80k/yr gross doesn't seem like so much.
NewsRight demands fees. Microsoft pays and pretends they're taking the moral high ground, in a complicated fashion that actually kicks the money back to them somehow. Other big aggregators tell them they'd rather just not include the content, and blacklist the NewsRight providers. Newsright finds some small 1-person website run by a disabled female veteran putting out news for the blind in a screen-reader friendly format, and sues her for One Millon Dollars. Streisand ensues, and Newsright crawls away with its tail between its legs. Meanwhile the members of Newsright cut side deals with the big aggregators and/or withdraw from the organization.
No. There is no legal entitlement granted by the copyright holder when they sell you a "phonorecord" (the legal term for an artifact embodying an audio recording), aside from title to that particular phonorecord. There are legal effects of holding title to that phonorecord.
Did you read what you just wrote?
You said 1 !=1 in the first sentence and then proceeded to contradict yourself in the 2nd sentence with 1 == 1.
I'm pointing out a fine distinction.
The physical phonorecord was 1 part of the sale, the legal entitlements were another.
And that's the distinction: they were not separate parts. They are inseparable.
You can, however, privately enjoy any copyrighted work without permission from the copyright holder
No. You Can't.
That's the whole idea of copyright in the first place. It is *not* just the control of making copies of the work, the distribution of copies, but also the performances and displays of the work.
PUBLIC performance. PUBLIC display.
Reading the book in your own home, looking at the art being "displayed", and listening to the phonograph being "played" are all acts that are covered under the copyright and are available to be controlled.
No, they are not. That's exactly the point I am making. The copyright holder cannot grant you license to do those things, because the copyright holder does not have the exclusive right to do those things. All of those things are outside the scope of copyright. Read 17 USC 101 and 17 USC 106.
No you are talking about the First Sale Doctrine and transfer of legal entitlements. When I "lend" you my book, I am also "lending" you my legal entitlements. This is not a problem in the case of a physical medium because it was a transfer in every sense of the word. I cannot read the book while you have it.
I am explicitly NOT talking about First Sale. There's no need to bring first sale into it. First sale excepts lending of particular copies from the distribution right for owners of those copies. Private performance and display, including reading a book (that is, displaying it to oneself), are simply outside the scope of copyright.
Why does the NFL go after small groups of private citizens trying to display Sunday football games on large screens in church gatherings?
Because they're a bunch of assholes. As to why they might be able to win (besides having better lawyers):
From 17 USC 101 "To perform or display a work "publicly" means--...to perform or display it at a place open to the public or at any place where a substantial number of persons outside of a normal circle of a family and its social acquaintances is gathered"
Most churches I know are open to the public, and even if they weren't, there's a lot of room for argument about what constitutes the "normal circle of a family and its social acquaintances".
Camoflauge face paint may fool some of the cameras some of the time, but the government can still track you 24/7 using the cellular brain implant that you didn't even know was there.
Slashdot Mirror
And a hydrochloric acid solution is a substance (anhydrous hydrogen chloride, a gas) dissolved in water.
I'd like to thank him for improving my pissing experience. Once I passed him, things got pretty gross.
Of course it is. Copyright violation is merely repeating what someone else had to say.
Sure. And the shithead engineers either get let go or promoted to management. The shithead sales people, on the other hand, get rewarded while engineering gets the whip.
Or would be, if downscaling algorithms hadn't been known for decades. Of course, if you write "downscaling...on a mobile device", that's a new patent. Then you can write dependent claims like
"method of claim X, where the downscaling is nearest-neighbor interpolation"
"method of claim X, where the downscaling is bilinear interpolation"
"method of claim X, where different downscaling methods are used on the luma and chroma components"
(stop me if you've heard all this before)
Climate change is in there because since the fall of the Soviet Union, no-shit world-ending catastrophe just isn't likely. Putin, the Chinese communist leaders, and Obama are all too busy enjoying wealth and power to blow it all up. Same goes for England and France. The lesser nuclear powers don't have what it takes to destroy the world. So to attempt to regains some relevance for the doomsday clock, they threw climate change in there.
A search of Usenet reveals the Atari Jaguar had a unit called a "GPU" in 1993, considerably before NVIDIA's "first GPU" in 1999. The Amiga unit was also called a GPU.
The term's generic, and NVIDIA knows it... they don't have it registered as a trademark.
Sure there is. School of Hard Knocks. Final exam: Find a story about online censorship on Slashdot. Defend it.
Sounds like you missed an arbitrage opportunity. Buy 20 for $5, sell for $100 each on Craigslist.
... for pedestrians.
I mean, seriously, what's the inventive step here? Navigation has been around a long time. Navigation based on various user-entered constraints has been around a long time (look at the truck navigation systems, where you can enter type of vehicle and any hazmats you're carrying). Navigation for pedestians has been around for a while (see Google Maps). So what's changed, they've added a few more constraints?
Talk to corporations about that. They're the only ones who can do it.
Home telephones don't store data (except the occasional phone number), so smartphones add a new aspect. The Uniform Trade Secret Act (UTSA) is pretty much silent on what constitutes "efforts that are reasonable under the circumstances to maintain its secrecy", so there's plenty of room for muddied waters there.
At least the bankers likely don't give two shits about copyright.
Maximum efficiency on modern cars is just short of WOT, as ECUs are programmed to enrich the mixture at WOT, and may go open-loop. So you want to open it just short of the point where power enrichment kicks in.
If you won't build the new ones, won't continue running the old ones, and can't or won't build enough conventional capacity to take up the slack, what are you going to do, go back to living in the dark?
This is the "white hat" answer you'll always get, but it doesn't work. Once you've submitted and the confrontation is over, your protests will simply fall on deaf ears. You submitted, you're not a problem, you can't even make noise any more.
And the ruling of that case -- Schenck v. US -- is that a law prohibiting distributing pamphlets claiming that the draft was unconstitutional was not unconstitutional, as such pamphlets were a clear and present danger to the United States.
Not a high point in First Amendment jurisprudence by any means. Burn in hell, Oliver Wendell Holmes.
"Rotational kakistodemocracy" is a recent coinage. I'm not sure what the author coining it meant, but what I mean by it is "government by one of a number of sets of the worst people around, the choice of which of those sets of worst people being determined by popular vote, and the choice occasionally changing."
Gas taxes are diverted to mass transit, among other things. Tolls are diverted to all sorts of boondoggles. Americans buy SUVs to handle the resulting potholes.
Yeah, with two caveats.
1) That assumes you have a job. Lots of unemployed IT people and IT people working in other professions aren't counted.
2) A lot of these jobs are in high cost of living areas like New York City or Silicon Valley. When a 1BR apartment costs north of $2000/month, $80k/yr gross doesn't seem like so much.
Darth Vader
Sam (said "precious" being Frodo)
Ridley
NewsRight demands fees. Microsoft pays and pretends they're taking the moral high ground, in a complicated fashion that actually kicks the money back to them somehow. Other big aggregators tell them they'd rather just not include the content, and blacklist the NewsRight providers. Newsright finds some small 1-person website run by a disabled female veteran putting out news for the blind in a screen-reader friendly format, and sues her for One Millon Dollars. Streisand ensues, and Newsright crawls away with its tail between its legs. Meanwhile the members of Newsright cut side deals with the big aggregators and/or withdraw from the organization.
Actually, the USA is a rotational representative kakistodemocracy.
I'm pointing out a fine distinction.
And that's the distinction: they were not separate parts. They are inseparable.
PUBLIC performance. PUBLIC display.
No, they are not. That's exactly the point I am making. The copyright holder cannot grant you license to do those things, because the copyright holder does not have the exclusive right to do those things. All of those things are outside the scope of copyright. Read 17 USC 101 and 17 USC 106.
I am explicitly NOT talking about First Sale. There's no need to bring first sale into it. First sale excepts lending of particular copies from the distribution right for owners of those copies. Private performance and display, including reading a book (that is, displaying it to oneself), are simply outside the scope of copyright.
Because they're a bunch of assholes. As to why they might be able to win (besides having better lawyers):
From 17 USC 101 ...to perform or display it at a place open to the public or at any place where a substantial number of persons outside of a normal circle of a family and its social acquaintances is gathered"
"To perform or display a work "publicly" means--
Most churches I know are open to the public, and even if they weren't, there's a lot of room for argument about what constitutes the "normal circle of a family and its social acquaintances".
Mine's on T-Mobile. Good luck to them.