By the way, prefixes are very important in electrical engineering, and 1 kilo ohm is definitely not 1024 ohms,
Perhaps not nowadays. But when the binary prefixes started being used, you'd be hard pressed to get a resistor with a margin of error less than than 24 ohms per thousand.
Yes they can. If you encode a movie and redistribute said movie you have to pay a fee for it. that includes every home user. you have a digital camera you upload that content onto the net you have redistributed their codec and are required to pay a licensing fee.
Fuck that shit. If I encode a movie with a (licensed) encoder, said movie is not "the codec". It is the result of applying the codec to a video stream. It's no more patented by them than a piece of wood drilled through by a patented drill bit is patented by the drill bit owner. They can claim otherwise all they want, but their claim won't survive the first time they try to enforce it against a big player... and trying to enforce it against small fry won't pay the bills.
This needs to be modded up. I can't comment on libertarian candidates (they always seemed a little kooky to me, as a Canadian, though), but things would not be any better under any of the other viable choices you Americans had. I can understand being upset that Obama didn't quite 'keep his promises' in the ways you want (though there are some areas he is certainly making efforts, such as the healthcare bill -- even if it was watered down to its passed form...), but don't compare him to Bush.
Why not? He's acting just like Bush in most of the areas the loudest complaints about Bush were made. Expansion of executive power beyond all reasonable bounds (remember Bush's assertion he needed no approval for wiretapping?) being one of them.
No, of course neither Clinton nor McCain would have done this differently. But with McCain, that's what McCain voters would have wanted. Obama campaigned on "change".
If one were to take a time machine back to October 2008 and show them an article dated 2010 labeled "President claims power to implement agreement by executive fiat" or some such thing, you'd think that obviously McCain won, right?
Murdochs media imperium is big enough that it will not fall in 5 years. He can suffer from 2-3 years of lower income, his treasure chest holds enough cash. He will get ROI on this scheme and other media outlets will follow suit. ACTA and DMCA will of course help with this.
ACTA isn't even finished yet, let alone implemented. And the DMCA is worthless for news; Murdoch can't find infringement and issue notice fast enough to matter. And as for the ROI on this scheme, it will be negative ROI.
You may not be happy with this course of events, but unless you are Bill Gates and have enough cash to burn on providing the information and the opinions wanted by your target audience, what will you do, if all links to the information you need and want are behind this paywalls?
He's got to get there first. Until then, basically the same information will be available elsewhere. And as was pointed out upthread, the more news sites that hide behind paywalls, the more valuable advertising on the remaining sites will be.
Yeah, the 'moral dilemma' is kinda silly. But why stop at curing colourblindness? When can I get my IR and UV vision?
You already have UV vision, you need merely remove the UV filter. (that is, replace the lens with one clear in the UV range). It's kind of hard on the retina though.
It sounds like that is exactly what they want to do: treat the delivery of the final product as a sale and apply sales tax to it. Open source or not wouldn't matter.
Which wouldn't be horrendously unreasonable. But that's not what they're doing. Washington state sales tax is 6.5%. It appears this _already_ applies to services. This is a special "punish the little guy for the sins of Microsoft" 10% tax, probably in addition to the 6.5% sales tax.
I second this! TJX used default passwords and several other bad practices and kept on once they knew they had a problem. Had they taken the public's data security seriously, this guy would likely never had been able to do what he did here.
Usually when this argument is raised it's when someone just used a default password, looked around the system, maybe even informed the operator, and got prosecuted for it. That isn't the case here... doesn't matter if the door's ajar, that's still not an excuse for going in and walking off with the jewelery and electronics.
If I open the door and tell everyone come get this other persons shit, then I am liable as well. It is sad that TJX isn't in this case. I have even heard of someone in my area who were able to trace their trouble to TJX, as they rarely used the card. I asked if they shopped there and yup, that was the only place they had used the card in since the beginning of the year before that.
If you have someone else's physical item in your possession, you might be civilly liable if it gets stolen if you didn't take ordinary precautions to prevent it, but you won't go to jail. In this case, due to the law it's the credit card companies who are on the hook (and they tend to push it back on the merchants who accepted the stolen cards and numbers). Maybe they could sue TJX, but it wouldn't be worth it, particularly as I'm sure TJX is a major customer. Maybe they'll insist TJX let them audit their systems in the future.
That was in Russia - and is typical of elementary schools there - but I don't think that it's relevant. Unless, that is, you're willing to argue that American kids are somehow mentally deficient from birth...
Ah, but what you don't realize is that Russian kids who didn't show any promise in math were taken away to special schools, taught in English, where they trained deep cover agents for use in espionage against America. It seems the FBI had learned that aptitude in math was a major red flag.
If the schools then were as bad as they are now, then if you were in one of the non-advanced tracks (assuming, again, such a thing existed) you got your basic addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division early on in elementary school. Maybe you got some of the dreaded "word problems". Then you went and did the EXACT SAME THING OVER AND OVER AGAIN all the way into high school. Of course removing most of that made no difference.
Where I went to school, the advanced track would then go on to pre-algebra (waste of time, just algebra without formal symbolism), algebra (2 years), trig/geometry (pre-calculus), and then Calculus. I don't think you could cut out all of that and not make a difference.
You can be a "totalitarian dictatorship" on top of virtually any economic system(other than the ones that are too unproductive to support any sort of central government with real power).
INCLUDING those; look at Haiti under the Duvaliers.
Of course, the Wikipedia article makes it all the USs fault...
Actually, bottled water in general is a good counter example to the original post: tap water in the US is actually better regulated than bottled water (so the threshold to which it's clean is stricter, unless the bottler wants to be nicer than legally required), but with some snazzy marketing, people pay for bottled water thinking it's better than tap water.
Tap water in Philadelphia (a.k.a "Schuylkill Punch") is often yellow and burns the throat. If the standards are that lax, it's clear that both most tap water and most bottled water providers are going beyond the standards.
Are you kidding? Every credit card app I've ever filled out asked more invasive questions like how much I make annually, my SSN, and my work and address history.
The government already knows all that from your tax returns anyway.
No it doesnt. An application for your local grocery customer loyalty program usually asks more questions. Even the registration form for most home appliances asks for more.
I've never seen home appliance registration forms ask for race. And I never fill out the various marketing questions on those forms -- just my name, address, and model and serial numbers of the appliances. I suspect most of those complaining about the census also do not fill out the various marketing questions, if they send in the forms at all.
Seems to me that on a study that is basically about biochemistry, you'd think Princeton could have found a biochemistry researcher to run it. Instead, they have a psychology professor. WTF?
Could at least the editors read the claims before posting nonsense like "cover any smartphone with built-in accelerometer"? This patent is not overly broad in any sense.
Claim 1 covers any computing device which can be controlled by moving it back and forth, up and down, left and right, or turning it in both directions around any of the three axes. That's not overbroad?
If you've got some hot information that you know governments will try to suppress, why the heck would you give them a few weeks to do so? Just put the information out right away; then it's too late to be effectively suppressed.
The only big thing they'll be upset about is pre-existing conditions, and you can bet your bottom dollar that their friends in high places will ensure they continue to be profitable nonetheless.
Maybe. On the other hand, the max penalty for not getting insurance is 2.5% of income. For most people (I assume including most uninsured) that's far less than the _current_ cost of health insurance. Add in the extra costs incurred by covering pre-existing conditions, and premiums will have to go up. The extra people brought in by the vouchers and the individual mandate may not be sufficient to avoid runaway adverse selection, which would not be good for the insurance companies.
There's something more than a little sick about "solving" the problem of the uninsured by penalizing them. It somehow seems very... Republican, actually.
His blog entry seems to suggest that the question the jury considered was whether his failure to comply with a command was sufficient to warrant his conviction.
No, the jury was TOLD that his failure to comply with a command was sufficient to warrant his conviction. They were only asked to decide whether or not he was to fail to comply. There ain't no justice.
If a cop socks you in the face for no reason, and decides to bring you up on charges for "resisting a police officer", you'll be convicted on the grounds that your face impeded the free movement of the cop's fist. (and no, I'm not exaggerating).
Any juror who won't essentially agree to convict will be dismissed during voir dire.
Some people actually like prison. It's an environment where you literally have to try to screw up and where all the choices are made for you, so you just have to do whatever you do and you'll be fine.
Unless you're young, white, male, and of slight build. Then it's pound-you-in-the-ass time.
I mean, if I worked at a financial org, and they asked me to write some wierd code that created dummy trade records, I may think 'eh?' and ask whether it was correct or not, but they'd then tell me its all legal, above board and just another one of those stupid regulatory rules that seem to make no sense to mere programmers... and I'd shrug, say "well, ok then" and do it. then they give me a huge bonus and I think "great, working for financial services is wonderful - they always pay large bonuses"
Being the suspicious type, I'd probably ask this question in email, and bcc the thread to an account elsewhere -- preferably somewhere that if push came to shove, could demonstrate to a court's satisfaction that those emails were at least sent when I said they were sent rather than made up after the fact.
Slashdot Mirror
Perhaps not nowadays. But when the binary prefixes started being used, you'd be hard pressed to get a resistor with a margin of error less than than 24 ohms per thousand.
Fuck that shit. If I encode a movie with a (licensed) encoder, said movie is not "the codec". It is the result of applying the codec to a video stream. It's no more patented by them than a piece of wood drilled through by a patented drill bit is patented by the drill bit owner. They can claim otherwise all they want, but their claim won't survive the first time they try to enforce it against a big player... and trying to enforce it against small fry won't pay the bills.
Why not? He's acting just like Bush in most of the areas the loudest complaints about Bush were made. Expansion of executive power beyond all reasonable bounds (remember Bush's assertion he needed no approval for wiretapping?) being one of them.
No, of course neither Clinton nor McCain would have done this differently. But with McCain, that's what McCain voters would have wanted. Obama campaigned on "change".
If one were to take a time machine back to October 2008 and show them an article dated 2010 labeled "President claims power to implement agreement by executive fiat" or some such thing, you'd think that obviously McCain won, right?
Just more evidence that Obama = Bush.
ACTA isn't even finished yet, let alone implemented. And the DMCA is worthless for news; Murdoch can't find infringement and issue notice fast enough to matter. And as for the ROI on this scheme, it will be negative ROI.
He's got to get there first. Until then, basically the same information will be available elsewhere. And as was pointed out upthread, the more news sites that hide behind paywalls, the more valuable advertising on the remaining sites will be.
You already have UV vision, you need merely remove the UV filter. (that is, replace the lens with one clear in the UV range). It's kind of hard on the retina though.
Which wouldn't be horrendously unreasonable. But that's not what they're doing. Washington state sales tax is 6.5%. It appears this _already_ applies to services. This is a special "punish the little guy for the sins of Microsoft" 10% tax, probably in addition to the 6.5% sales tax.
http://dor.wa.gov/content/findtaxesandrates/retailsalestax/
Usually when this argument is raised it's when someone just used a default password, looked around the system, maybe even informed the operator, and got prosecuted for it. That isn't the case here... doesn't matter if the door's ajar, that's still not an excuse for going in and walking off with the jewelery and electronics.
If you have someone else's physical item in your possession, you might be civilly liable if it gets stolen if you didn't take ordinary precautions to prevent it, but you won't go to jail. In this case, due to the law it's the credit card companies who are on the hook (and they tend to push it back on the merchants who accepted the stolen cards and numbers). Maybe they could sue TJX, but it wouldn't be worth it, particularly as I'm sure TJX is a major customer. Maybe they'll insist TJX let them audit their systems in the future.
Fortunately the FCC is unlikely to do anything about it unless you're using enough power to bother AT&T, Verizon, or Comcast.
It's not that I can't understand it, it's that I can't read it. Alas, I simply cannot tell the difference between 2.8V and 0V.
Ah, but what you don't realize is that Russian kids who didn't show any promise in math were taken away to special schools, taught in English, where they trained deep cover agents for use in espionage against America. It seems the FBI had learned that aptitude in math was a major red flag.
If the schools then were as bad as they are now, then if you were in one of the non-advanced tracks (assuming, again, such a thing existed) you got your basic addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division early on in elementary school. Maybe you got some of the dreaded "word problems". Then you went and did the EXACT SAME THING OVER AND OVER AGAIN all the way into high school. Of course removing most of that made no difference.
Where I went to school, the advanced track would then go on to pre-algebra (waste of time, just algebra without formal symbolism), algebra (2 years), trig/geometry (pre-calculus), and then Calculus. I don't think you could cut out all of that and not make a difference.
INCLUDING those; look at Haiti under the Duvaliers.
Of course, the Wikipedia article makes it all the USs fault...
Tap water in Philadelphia (a.k.a "Schuylkill Punch") is often yellow and burns the throat. If the standards are that lax, it's clear that both most tap water and most bottled water providers are going beyond the standards.
The government already knows all that from your tax returns anyway.
I've never seen home appliance registration forms ask for race. And I never fill out the various marketing questions on those forms -- just my name, address, and model and serial numbers of the appliances. I suspect most of those complaining about the census also do not fill out the various marketing questions, if they send in the forms at all.
Agonist. Definitely agonist, not antagonist.
Seems to me that on a study that is basically about biochemistry, you'd think Princeton could have found a biochemistry researcher to run it. Instead, they have a psychology professor. WTF?
Claim 1 covers any computing device which can be controlled by moving it back and forth, up and down, left and right, or turning it in both directions around any of the three axes. That's not overbroad?
If you've got some hot information that you know governments will try to suppress, why the heck would you give them a few weeks to do so? Just put the information out right away; then it's too late to be effectively suppressed.
Maybe. On the other hand, the max penalty for not getting insurance is 2.5% of income. For most people (I assume including most uninsured) that's far less than the _current_ cost of health insurance. Add in the extra costs incurred by covering pre-existing conditions, and premiums will have to go up. The extra people brought in by the vouchers and the individual mandate may not be sufficient to avoid runaway adverse selection, which would not be good for the insurance companies.
There's something more than a little sick about "solving" the problem of the uninsured by penalizing them. It somehow seems very... Republican, actually.
No, the jury was TOLD that his failure to comply with a command was sufficient to warrant his conviction. They were only asked to decide whether or not he was to fail to comply. There ain't no justice.
If a cop socks you in the face for no reason, and decides to bring you up on charges for "resisting a police officer", you'll be convicted on the grounds that your face impeded the free movement of the cop's fist. (and no, I'm not exaggerating).
Any juror who won't essentially agree to convict will be dismissed during voir dire.
Unless you're young, white, male, and of slight build. Then it's pound-you-in-the-ass time.
Being the suspicious type, I'd probably ask this question in email, and bcc the thread to an account elsewhere -- preferably somewhere that if push came to shove, could demonstrate to a court's satisfaction that those emails were at least sent when I said they were sent rather than made up after the fact.