1) There is already enough juice in the grid at night to power 80% of the 220 million cars without any further need for more power plants.
You might want to double-check those figures before accepting them as gospel. They're not assuming charging at night; they're assuming that any and all excess non-peaking capacity in the electrical grid is used to charge the cars. This is wildly unrealistic and provides only a best-case figure. Basically they're saying that if you ran every coal plant in the country balls-out at all times, you could provide power to 180 million cars... average. In the summer and winter less, in the fall and spring more.
From the report: "The valley-filling methodology is predicated on the notion that the entire PHEV load is managed to fit perfectly into the valley without setting new peaks."
What people do not understand is the full spectrum of promotion. Kill off the record companies and promotion dies. With it go a lot of magazines that music promotion is supporting. FM Radio is going to change a lot in the US, because it is mostly a music promotion vehicle. I would expect most stations to just give up and shut down. The rest will do something else. They will not be playing popular music.
OK, sounds like a deal... wait... is there a downside to all this?
No, based on what I've seen here on Slashdot, we've tried the whine cellar.
One man's soap box is another's whine cellar; the only difference is the listeners' willingness to accept the message.
Have you seen the South Park episode about the hippie infestation? The one, you know, where everything bad is blamed on "the Corporations"? In the average person's eyes, we look like the hippies, and we've got to stop doing that.
We're never going to look like Authority. And if the RIAA's real strategy is acting so much like the bogeyman that their opponents look silly when they call the RIAA what they are, it's working masterfully.
I won't do it. If it's a choice between voting for what I know is legally correct (according to the judge's instructions) and I know is unjust, or voting for what I know is just despite the fact that it violates the law or the judge's instructions, I will vote for the latter. This attitude, of course, will get me excluded from a jury.
As it should.
Well, we tried the soap box, but they had a bigger one. We tried the ballot box, but they owned the candidates. We tried the jury box, but they excluded us from the jury. What's left?
And they've probably never met anyone who was. Military knowledge in this crowd usually stops somewhere around the US Civil War or WWI, because they really do think of those guys as cannon fodder.
So there's no more breaking down recruits as individuals in order to build them up as soldiers? I find that hard to believe.
While you may be right in that it is unlikely that a fuck-the-system-and-down-with-the-man hippie would survive the jury selection process, I want to state that as a juror you are to uphold the law.
I won't do it. If it's a choice between voting for what I know is legally correct (according to the judge's instructions) and I know is unjust, or voting for what I know is just despite the fact that it violates the law or the judge's instructions, I will vote for the latter. This attitude, of course, will get me excluded from a jury.
Personally I'd have gone for "guilty".
Odd, because in a civil case there are only findings for the plaintiff and for the defendant, not of guilt or innocence.
One thing that isn't discussed (which is important) is a facility for recovering the encrypted data should the TPM be off or erased.
Unfortunately, this falls under the category of "controlled destruction of security". Once you have such a method, you can attack either it OR the TPM, and compromising either one gets you the whole system. Doesn't mean it's worthless, just means it IS a compromise.
Purely out of morbid curiosity (and I accept we've gone beyond conspiracy theory and are riding off into the sunset at this point), I wonder how the US DOJ would react if this was true and they found out about it.
I'm sure they'd be "shocked, shocked" to find that some sort of collusion was going on here.
(I doubt it, though. The RIAA has proven incompetent in covering up its misdeeds... probably because they don't have to bother because no one who matters objects to them)
Yes, it tells us that copyright is taking pretty seriously by most people.
Means nothing of the sort, because the jury didn't even get to decide on whether or not the defendant is liable.
It tells us that you are highly unlikely to find a jury that is sympathetic to the infringment of the rights of others.
Objection, begging the question. In any event, jurors are chosen from the most authority-supporting segment of the population -- they're those who don't duck jury duty and then survive voir dire. The RIAA, nasty as it is (and that likely actually helps), looks like Authority, and so they get the default support of the jurors.
It tells us that no matter how despicable the RIAA may be, they are still legally correct. It tells us that the fantasy legal arguments often waved about on Slashdot are fantasies that hold no weight in a courtroom.
Well, it tells us there ain't no justice. What else is new?
Seriously, these events attract at lot of smart, independent thinking people who love technology. What better place to recruit people?
Emphasis mine. Civilian positions are one thing, but it seems to me if you put a smart and independent thinking person through the military's recruit-crusher, you're either going to get a non-independent-thinking person, a smart and independent thinking person who has been faking non-independent thinking and hates the military for it, or a corpse.
Hackers & discipline... probably not the best combination ever.
In addition, it should be relatively easy to program a PLA (programmable logic array) with a USB interface to create a small device to upload the key-logger to the keyboard. That device could be fit into a hollowed out cell phone so that no one would be the wiser.
No need for a "hollowed out cell phone". You could just use a real cell phone with a USB interface. Such as a jailbroken iPhone.
It's unclear. The FSF's position is that dynamic linking against a GPL library does produce a derivative work that is covered by the GPL.
Suppose it does. The GPL V2 allows creation of derivative works; the restrictions are on distribution of them. Since nobody distributes the dynamically linked work, there's no copyright violation. The GPL V3 is even more clear on this: "You may make, run and propagate covered works that you do not convey, without conditions so long as your license otherwise remains in force."
So I can link a non-GPL work against a GPL work without restriction. If I then distribute the non-GPL work, without the GPL work, the GPL cannot apply (because I haven't attempted to do anything restricted by its copyright). If the end user then re-links my work against another copy of the GPLed work, there's no violation there either. Distributing or conveying an image of the combined work (e.g. a dump of the process's address space) would be a violation, but that normally doesn't happen.
(and before anyone starts yelling "secondary infringement", there can be no secondary infringement if there is no direct infringement)
It appears, from another article, that Xcel wants to charge a fee based on the power generation capacity of a customer's solar panels. This seems totally unreasonable, except for one thing -- net metering. Net metering means Xcel essentially buys the customer's power at _retail_. So Xcel has to eat part of the transmission and distribution costs for the customer electricity. Net metering is required by federal law, so they can't just not do it. This seems to be an attempt to find a way around it.
Xcel already charges a flat fee to all customers (in addition to metered charges); this is on top of that.
1) Maori, in full dress and tattoo 2) One of several American and Mexican Indian tribes, also in full regalia 3) The legendary Amazon tribe. 4) Gurkhas! 5) Santa Ana's army 6) Custer's Army 7) Bowie et al.
Now, clearly I've stacked the deck against the "white" teams. But if such a game would be made, who do you think would scream the loudest? (besides Jack Thompson)
For a long time while I was playing the Marathon series, I thought I was playing a black guy (because you could see the character's hands, which were dark brown). Then someone pointed out to me that the character had gloves on. Somehow, as a non-black person, I didn't feel any less oppressed as a result.
For what voyage does it make sense to take a plane which only goes 100mph? There's remote locations where you can take a plane point-to-point but not a land vehicle, but not really all that many.
It's clear that the game is rigged. Here, with the defenses all tossed out before the case even got to the jury. Worldwide, as the Pirate Bay trial with the judge being the next best thing to a card-carrying member of the copyright cartel. All your presence does is legitimize the system by making it look like something other than the RIAA and its allies steamrolling over those without the resources (including paid-off legislators and fellow-traveler judges) to fight them.
So the hackers, having figured out how to rig the meters, set up their own meters at a few places in the city. With them they place large signs "Hacker Parking Only, Everyone Else $1,000,000". One day they notice a Porsche 959 pull up to the meter. A somewhat geeky looking man in his mid-50s gets out, looks at the sign, places a card in the meter, and it flips over to "2 hours paid". One of the hackers then walks up to the man and says "Hey, Bill Gates! I knew you started out as a hacker but I didn't know you still kept in the game!". And Gates says "What hack? I just paid the meter".
As far as I can tell, the decision said only that the 11-word snippets did not fall under a "transient copying" exception, not that they consisted copying substantial enough to infringe copyright.
NMap uses a modified GPL license that states that the output from the NMap program itself is subject to copyright and the GPL.
I can state that the sky is green, but it don't make it so.
Yes, the NMap authors claim that a program which "Executes Nmap and parses the results" is a derivative work, but that doesn't make it so. They don't actually claim the output is copyrighted.
For reading in obscure file formats, Emacs usually has an answer - with good syntax highlighting.
I was disappointed, however, to find that it lacks a MDL (Muddle) mode. It almost certainly had one at some point, I might have to check back in negative version numbers or something.
Slashdot Mirror
You might want to double-check those figures before accepting them as gospel. They're not assuming charging at night; they're assuming that any and all excess non-peaking capacity in the electrical grid is used to charge the cars. This is wildly unrealistic and provides only a best-case figure. Basically they're saying that if you ran every coal plant in the country balls-out at all times, you could provide power to 180 million cars... average. In the summer and winter less, in the fall and spring more.
From the report:
"The valley-filling methodology is predicated on the notion that the entire PHEV load is managed to fit perfectly into the valley without setting new peaks."
OK, sounds like a deal... wait... is there a downside to all this?
One man's soap box is another's whine cellar; the only difference is the listeners' willingness to accept the message.
We're never going to look like Authority. And if the RIAA's real strategy is acting so much like the bogeyman that their opponents look silly when they call the RIAA what they are, it's working masterfully.
Well, we tried the soap box, but they had a bigger one. We tried the ballot box, but they owned the candidates. We tried the jury box, but they excluded us from the jury. What's left?
So there's no more breaking down recruits as individuals in order to build them up as soldiers? I find that hard to believe.
I won't do it. If it's a choice between voting for what I know is legally correct (according to the judge's instructions) and I know is unjust, or voting for what I know is just despite the fact that it violates the law or the judge's instructions, I will vote for the latter. This attitude, of course, will get me excluded from a jury.
Odd, because in a civil case there are only findings for the plaintiff and for the defendant, not of guilt or innocence.
Unfortunately, this falls under the category of "controlled destruction of security". Once you have such a method, you can attack either it OR the TPM, and compromising either one gets you the whole system. Doesn't mean it's worthless, just means it IS a compromise.
I'm sure they'd be "shocked, shocked" to find that some sort of collusion was going on here.
(I doubt it, though. The RIAA has proven incompetent in covering up its misdeeds... probably because they don't have to bother because no one who matters objects to them)
Means nothing of the sort, because the jury didn't even get to decide on whether or not the defendant is liable.
Objection, begging the question. In any event, jurors are chosen from the most authority-supporting segment of the population -- they're those who don't duck jury duty and then survive voir dire. The RIAA, nasty as it is (and that likely actually helps), looks like Authority, and so they get the default support of the jurors.
Well, it tells us there ain't no justice. What else is new?
Obviously, what we need is open source digitally enhanced hot chicks.
Emphasis mine. Civilian positions are one thing, but it seems to me if you put a smart and independent thinking person through the military's recruit-crusher, you're either going to get a non-independent-thinking person, a smart and independent thinking person who has been faking non-independent thinking and hates the military for it, or a corpse.
Hackers & discipline... probably not the best combination ever.
No need for a "hollowed out cell phone". You could just use a real cell phone with a USB interface. Such as a jailbroken iPhone.
Suppose it does. The GPL V2 allows creation of derivative works; the restrictions are on distribution of them. Since nobody distributes the dynamically linked work, there's no copyright violation. The GPL V3 is even more clear on this: "You may make, run and propagate covered works that you do not convey, without conditions so long as your license otherwise remains in force."
So I can link a non-GPL work against a GPL work without restriction. If I then distribute the non-GPL work, without the GPL work, the GPL cannot apply (because I haven't attempted to do anything restricted by its copyright). If the end user then re-links my work against another copy of the GPLed work, there's no violation there either. Distributing or conveying an image of the combined work (e.g. a dump of the process's address space) would be a violation, but that normally doesn't happen.
(and before anyone starts yelling "secondary infringement", there can be no secondary infringement if there is no direct infringement)
It appears, from another article, that Xcel wants to charge a fee based on the power generation capacity of a customer's solar panels. This seems totally unreasonable, except for one thing -- net metering. Net metering means Xcel essentially buys the customer's power at _retail_. So Xcel has to eat part of the transmission and distribution costs for the customer electricity. Net metering is required by federal law, so they can't just not do it. This seems to be an attempt to find a way around it.
Xcel already charges a flat fee to all customers (in addition to metered charges); this is on top of that.
http://www.denverpost.com/breakingnews/ci_12914520?source=rss
You're assuming that "we" have a problem. It is YOU, the self-designated representative of the PC brigade, who has a problem.
A war game, where the teams you can choose from
1) Maori, in full dress and tattoo
2) One of several American and Mexican Indian tribes, also in full regalia
3) The legendary Amazon tribe.
4) Gurkhas!
5) Santa Ana's army
6) Custer's Army
7) Bowie et al.
Now, clearly I've stacked the deck against the "white" teams. But if such a game would be made, who do you think would scream the loudest? (besides Jack Thompson)
For a long time while I was playing the Marathon series, I thought I was playing a black guy (because you could see the character's hands, which were dark brown). Then someone pointed out to me that the character had gloves on. Somehow, as a non-black person, I didn't feel any less oppressed as a result.
For what voyage does it make sense to take a plane which only goes 100mph? There's remote locations where you can take a plane point-to-point but not a land vehicle, but not really all that many.
It's clear that the game is rigged. Here, with the defenses all tossed out before the case even got to the jury. Worldwide, as the Pirate Bay trial with the judge being the next best thing to a card-carrying member of the copyright cartel. All your presence does is legitimize the system by making it look like something other than the RIAA and its allies steamrolling over those without the resources (including paid-off legislators and fellow-traveler judges) to fight them.
So the hackers, having figured out how to rig the meters, set up their own meters at a few places in the city. With them they place large signs "Hacker Parking Only, Everyone Else $1,000,000". One day they notice a Porsche 959 pull up to the meter. A somewhat geeky looking man in his mid-50s gets out, looks at the sign, places a card in the meter, and it flips over to "2 hours paid". One of the hackers then walks up to the man and says "Hey, Bill Gates! I knew you started out as a hacker but I didn't know you still kept in the game!". And Gates says "What hack? I just paid the meter".
As far as I can tell, the decision said only that the 11-word snippets did not fall under a "transient copying" exception, not that they consisted copying substantial enough to infringe copyright.
I can state that the sky is green, but it don't make it so.
Yes, the NMap authors claim that a program which "Executes Nmap and parses the results" is a derivative work, but that doesn't make it so. They don't actually claim the output is copyrighted.
I recently wrote one I call "Confusion". It should be up on the Interactive Fiction archive soon.
They've just trained teams of underpaid humans to answer the search results. That's how they get a valid copyright.
I was disappointed, however, to find that it lacks a MDL (Muddle) mode. It almost certainly had one at some point, I might have to check back in negative version numbers or something.