We are simply carriers for genese. Evolution is gene centric. Most of your genes are useless to you. Stuff that is stupid at a critter level can make perfect sense at a gene level. Those little bastards are using us, and don't care about us at all, as long as we breed.
Don't anthropomorphize genes; they don't like it.
Evolution just needs seperate populations and/or environments. Eventually populations diverge and become more suited to their environments.
Evolution also needs variation. Mutation is one mechanism which provides that (though not the only one).
The thing about the Kindle and the earlier Sony reader is there's a lot of space taken up by stuff that's not screen. To me, that's a problem. I want my e-book to be as much screen as possible, tempered only by the fact that I have to hold it. The REB-1100 (RocketBook successor) is good for this. You've got a handle with two buttons (page forward and back), and the rest is a touch screen. The newer Sony looks like they may have the right idea as well, but I've not seen one in person. I really like the REB-1100, but it has some flaws -- the big one is a black-and-white low resolution screen. But IMO $350 is too much for a reader.
Contrary to popular opinion, e-ink isn't the only way to get a screen readable in direct sunlight. The REB-1100 has a screen which can be used either backlit or reflective, so it's readable indoors or out. I think this is part of what limits it to 1-bit depth though.
Presumably because the students weren't the ones who signed the reams of paperwork acknowledging they were being given access to sensitive data and shouldn't be sharing it with foreign nationals. Unless procedures have changed a lot, you don't get legitimate access to such information without being told ad nauseum who you should and shouldn't be sharing it with and what the penalties are for breaking those rules.
You can exercise your way out of a diet that simply has too many calories.
No, not really. If you're talking about a few hundred calories, maybe...
Uh, yeah. If you're eating thousands of extra calories a day, there's numerous reasons you can't exercise your way out; for one thing, you probably aren't physically capable of doing much exercise.
Building muscle doesn't help too much. I believe you burn 4 more calories per day by adding one pound of muscle.
Even if you don't burn any more calories per day, having a pound of muscle is better than having a pound of fat.
It is, indeed, illegal to pass any vehicle while having a solid yellow- these cases are just not brought to court very often. This matter would only come into play if the motorist and/or the cyclist is brought up on charges for some other moving violation offense.
Can you state the section of the Pennsylvania (my state) vehicle code which says you can't pass a vehicle within the lane where there's a double yellow?
The Universal laws exist, mostly as a collection of case law from various parts of the country, to serve as a reference for areas of road law which may not be covered in a particular jurisdiction. They serve as the de facto standard, unless there exists local laws which specifically and directly contradict the Universal code. For example, the universal laws contain legal verbage stating that rear lights are required for safer bike travel at night. So, if you were riding your bike at night without a rear light, and were involved in an altercation, you would be very likely held liable for that detail, regardless of local law, unless otherwise specifically stated. Even then, the judge and/or jury could use case law against your argument if deemed appropriate.
There are no "Universal" traffic laws. One cannot be fined for riding without a rear light in Pennsylvania, because there is no statute requiring a rear light.
Cars always win in the sense that the cyclist will be more hurt. But they definitely do not win in the legal sense. Say I'm in a car and I hit a cyclist. No matter what the reasons for the collision, the first reaction will normally be to blame the driver.
Sure. But even if you're at fault if you know the magic words*, you can normally get off with a slap on the wrist. It'll cost some fines and maybe some license points, but no jail time and probably not even license suspension.
Personally, when I'm on a bike, I'd much rather have the cars pass me than sit behind me doing my speed. The speed limit's 45, I'm climbing a hill, there's plenty of room, PASS me already, don't sit behind me like a vulture waiting for his prey to stop moving.
Its a nonsense argument, and any doctor or nutritionist or even personal trainer will tell you, you can't exercise you're way out of a shitty diet.
You can't exercise your way out of a shitty diet -- one lacking in nutrients or containing too many harmful substances. You can exercise your way out of a diet that simply has too many calories. Two ways. One, you burn more calories. Two, you build muscle.
You have always had the freedom to break the law, you just have to expect that there will be consequences if you get caught.
That's a rather nihilistic view of freedom. "You have always had the freedom to criticize the Supreme Leader, you just have to expect that there will be conseqences, such as your torture and execution, if you get caught".
That would be CLINICAL depression. As in, the type caused by a chemical imbalance in the brain; as opposed to the type caused by your wife leaving you.
Despite the drug company propaganda, there's no objective test to distinguish the two. In general the levels of neurotransmitters in a patient's brain aren't measured anyway... and even if they were, there's no available way to tell if the levels were what they were because of some physical issue, or if they're that way because your wife left you.
However, TFA is talking about bipolar disorder, which is not the same as clinical depression.
-cyclists can ride as 'close as practicable from the side of the road', meaning they do NOT have to ride within the boundary of the shoulder, especially if there is debris on the far side.
It does not, however, give them carte blanche to ride in the middle of the lane, in the absence of hazards on the right side.
-motorists MUST obey all road laws when dealing with cyclists, including passing laws. It is against the law to pass cyclists with a solid yellow 'no pass' line on their side, just as it is when passing a car.
It is not illegal in my state to pass a cyclist within a lane, even where there's a solid yellow. Furthermore, if you actually expect motorists to sit behind cyclists in a no-passing zone simply because there's a double yellow line and insufficient room to pass within the lane (perhaps because the bicyclist is in the middle of the lane), you're dreaming.
-cyclists have the right to ride 2x2 in the road, but must let traffic pass when appropriate
Varies by jurisdiction.
-cyclists MAY take up an entire lane if they deem the situation to be potentially hazardous to them, eg when going over a hill.
In my state, there is no such exception to the rule that cyclists must remain as far to the right as practicable
-cyclists DO NOT have to come to a complete stop at stop signs, and they CAN travel through red lights. They have to make a concerted effort, however, to show responsibility and safety
There is no such law in my state; cyclists are required to stop at stop signs and are not permitted to travel through red lights.
-at night, bikes MUST have both front and rear lights, clearly visible to the driver, as well as side reflectors, and preferably reflective clothing.
My state does not require a rear light, and the law is silent on clothing.
...a huge fraction of the economy will soon degenerate into a free-for-all of special interest group favoritism, graft, corruption, and kickbacks?
Of course, Obama and Congress know all that. That's why they're doing it...
The only thing worse would be if it actually worked as advertised, reducing CO2 emissions (and thus power use) to the point where the US could not maintain its (remaining) industries or its standard of living.
As soon as Hollywood releases a bunch of geek-friendly movies "only on Blu-Ray", that'll be the end of the effectiveness of the DRM.
Right now it sort of looks like Blu-Ray is winning because it's an active battle. But as I understand BD+, that battle can't go on forever. Once the entire virtual machine has been figured out, it's all over for the protection side. Furthermore, even if that isn't the case, each release is in itself a stationary target. So each will be cracked eventually. If Hollywood only cares about first-mover advantage, that won't bother them. But I think they're too greedy for that.
Then again, if you don't agree with speed limits, get them changed - don't just break them and hope you don't get caught.
One of those methods is within my power. The other is not. I choose the one within my power. Freedom shouldn't only be for the charismatic and politically connected.
Overall, you see a societal decrease in violence. But a troubling trend is spree-killing in schools. That is largely a more recent phenomenon. 14 of the 15 deadliest incidents have occurred since 1996.
From Wikipedia, I have
UTAustin: 1966, 14 deaths CSU Fullerton: 1976, 7 deaths Cleveland School: 1991, 6 deaths University of Iowa: 1991, 6 deaths Lindhurst High School: 1992, 4 deaths Frontier Middle School: 1996, 3 deaths Heath High School: 1997, 3 deaths Westside Middle School: 1998, 5 deaths Columbine: 1999, 15 deaths Appalacahian School of Law: 2002, 3 deaths Red Lake: 2005, 8 deaths Nickel Mines: 2006, 6 deaths Virginia Tech: 2007, 33 deaths North Illinois University: 2008, 6 deaths
Note that 5 are before your watershed year of 1996, not just one. That's the US, but adding in the rest of the world doesn't support your figures either.
I've heard this agrument in the comment section of every story on this subject, and it has yet to convince me.
If there were no used games, couldn't publishers sell games at lower values, knowing that since they don't have to worry about lost sales to used game purchases, they could lower the price?
Just the opposite. If there were no used games, they could jack up the price on new games even higher, knowing that gamers wouldn't have the option of buying a used game instead. Simple economics -- restrict the supply of a substitute and you can raise the price give the same demand.
Yes and I'm sure the publishers will have just as little of a pain in their conscience when they implement DRM in their games so that they don't lose money.
I'll have even less of a pain in my conscience when I don't buy them. And when that DRM starts screwing up the experience of new purchasers, I'll have myself a great big belly laugh.
(spoken as a kid who wants to enter the video game industry one day and actually make money)
Sorry. The only people who make serious money in the video game industry are the big guys, just like any other industry. But in the video game industry, since the little guys really WANT to be there, the big guys take even more advantage of them and make them work longer hours at lower wages.
The special status of the Post Office was not at issue in the mail order case.
Also, even if Amazon doesn't have a business presence in a certain state, the affiliate DOES.
Which means the affiliate is responsible for collecting sales tax on anything the affiliate sells.
Amazon also provides services to its' affiliates in each state, over and above having a business presence there by proxy. By not providing mechanisms for the collection and reporting of sales taxes for their affiliates, Amazon has become an enabler of tax avoidance and tax fraud. Hello, RICO!
"Tax avoidance" isn't even illegal -- it refers to structuring your business so as to owe a minimum of tax. And Amazon isn't responsible for providing the mechanism for collection and reporting of sales tax for their affiliates. They couldn't even if they wanted to; the affiliates are independent businesses, not subsidiaries.
I'm not sure why this is "insightful". Glued together rocks -- that is, mortared stone -- are a proven building technology. Sure, if you want a big building, steel frame is a better choice. And wood frame is cheaper for the smaller stuff. But those glued-together rocks have their advantages.
Oh for the love of god. 90% of the tech shit you buy these days is designed to fail in two or three years. Yea, a lot of crap makes it past the three year mark, but most of it is DESIGNED to be thrown out. i.e. they are engineering waste.
The stuff I buy at the grocery store rarely lasts a week. Should we charge farmers for sewage plants?
A big theme in the DRM threads is that once you buy something, it is yours to do as your please. The necessary flip side of that is that it is your responsibility after that -- not the manufacturer's, and not whoever you bought it from. Making manufacturers responsible for ultimate disposal necessarily gives them an interest in control of the device throughout it's lifecycle. And that's a bad thing.
If you buy something out of state, you're supposed to pay the sales tax to your local state and then apply for a reimbursement from the state you paid the original tax in.
Wrong, as with most of the rest of your post. There is no such "reimbursement". If a resident of Maryland physically goes to Pennsylvania and buys something, the sales tax on the transaction is owed to Pennsylvania. There is no reimbursement, even if Maryland also demands a "use tax" on the item.
The Supreme Court decided some time ago (in a mail order case, not an Internet case) that companies could not be required to collect sales taxes for states in which they did not have a "nexus". It's not a matter of a "tax holiday" or of Congress sitting on their behind; Congress has no obligation to act for the states in this matter. It's not a matter of enforcing state law. It's a matter of states trying to widen the definition of that "nexus" beyond what the courts have accepted in the past. It probably won't work, but Amazon isn't willing to get into a court battle over it. Newegg, on the other hand, after initially collecting New York tax, ceased doing so after consulting their lawyers. NY has apparently not taken them up on the challenge.
If I read this right the cable operators are in for one hell of a bill in both storage and replication hardware to create duplicate copies for each user request. Storage is cheap, but since there are also legal (and relatively short) limits on how long you can buffer something before it counts as a copy this tends to complicate scalable data replication. Not impossible, just adds extra cost and complexity. Which no doubt will be passed on.
Maybe, and maybe not. The reason the court distinguished transmissions made from a single copy and transmissions made from multiple copies is that "...the source material of the transmission-limit[s] the potential audience of a transmission in this case and [is] therefore germane in determining whether that transmission is made 'to the public'". Since it is the effect of having unique copies assigned to a particular customer, and not the actual mechanical fact which is at issue, it's conceivable that a court would rule that a system which behaved as if there were multiple copies, even when only one physical copy existed, would also not be infringing.
That would be nice to have a standard for Li-ion batteries too, from mobile phones to shavers and laptops. This way, it would be easier to recycle and replace batteries, lower costs and remove vendor-specific locks. I like alkaline batteries: around 4-5 different formats to power most of our stuff. With Li-ion, we have gained in power and time, but lost in flexibility. Is that so difficult to implement ?
Lithium ion cells are standardized. Rebuilding the batteries by opening the casing and replacing the cells is often possible. But lithium-polymer cells are a different story; in order to use every bit of space inside the battery or device, the cells are shaped to fit it. So it really IS difficult to implement.
Slashdot Mirror
Don't anthropomorphize genes; they don't like it.
Evolution also needs variation. Mutation is one mechanism which provides that (though not the only one).
The thing about the Kindle and the earlier Sony reader is there's a lot of space taken up by stuff that's not screen. To me, that's a problem. I want my e-book to be as much screen as possible, tempered only by the fact that I have to hold it. The REB-1100 (RocketBook successor) is good for this. You've got a handle with two buttons (page forward and back), and the rest is a touch screen. The newer Sony looks like they may have the right idea as well, but I've not seen one in person. I really like the REB-1100, but it has some flaws -- the big one is a black-and-white low resolution screen. But IMO $350 is too much for a reader.
Contrary to popular opinion, e-ink isn't the only way to get a screen readable in direct sunlight. The REB-1100 has a screen which can be used either backlit or reflective, so it's readable indoors or out. I think this is part of what limits it to 1-bit depth though.
Presumably because the students weren't the ones who signed the reams of paperwork acknowledging they were being given access to sensitive data and shouldn't be sharing it with foreign nationals. Unless procedures have changed a lot, you don't get legitimate access to such information without being told ad nauseum who you should and shouldn't be sharing it with and what the penalties are for breaking those rules.
SELECT * FROM DB WHERE DBCLASS='REAL' QUERY_LANGUAGE NOT LIKE '%SQL%'
0 Rows Returned
(Stupid slashdot yelling filter. I hate queries in lowercase. )
Uh, yeah. If you're eating thousands of extra calories a day, there's numerous reasons you can't exercise your way out; for one thing, you probably aren't physically capable of doing much exercise.
Even if you don't burn any more calories per day, having a pound of muscle is better than having a pound of fat.
Can you state the section of the Pennsylvania (my state) vehicle code which says you can't pass a vehicle within the lane where there's a double yellow?
There are no "Universal" traffic laws. One cannot be fined for riding without a rear light in Pennsylvania, because there is no statute requiring a rear light.
Sure. But even if you're at fault if you know the magic words*, you can normally get off with a slap on the wrist. It'll cost some fines and maybe some license points, but no jail time and probably not even license suspension.
Personally, when I'm on a bike, I'd much rather have the cars pass me than sit behind me doing my speed. The speed limit's 45, I'm climbing a hill, there's plenty of room, PASS me already, don't sit behind me like a vulture waiting for his prey to stop moving.
*"I didn't see him"
You can't exercise your way out of a shitty diet -- one lacking in nutrients or containing too many harmful substances. You can exercise your way out of a diet that simply has too many calories. Two ways. One, you burn more calories. Two, you build muscle.
That's a rather nihilistic view of freedom. "You have always had the freedom to criticize the Supreme Leader, you just have to expect that there will be conseqences, such as your torture and execution, if you get caught".
Despite the drug company propaganda, there's no objective test to distinguish the two. In general the levels of neurotransmitters in a patient's brain aren't measured anyway... and even if they were, there's no available way to tell if the levels were what they were because of some physical issue, or if they're that way because your wife left you.
However, TFA is talking about bipolar disorder, which is not the same as clinical depression.
It does not, however, give them carte blanche to ride in the middle of the lane, in the absence of hazards on the right side.
It is not illegal in my state to pass a cyclist within a lane, even where there's a solid yellow. Furthermore, if you actually expect motorists to sit behind cyclists in a no-passing zone simply because there's a double yellow line and insufficient room to pass within the lane (perhaps because the bicyclist is in the middle of the lane), you're dreaming.
Varies by jurisdiction.
In my state, there is no such exception to the rule that cyclists must remain as far to the right as practicable
There is no such law in my state; cyclists are required to stop at stop signs and are not permitted to travel through red lights.
My state does not require a rear light, and the law is silent on clothing.
The only thing worse would be if it actually worked as advertised, reducing CO2 emissions (and thus power use) to the point where the US could not maintain its (remaining) industries or its standard of living.
As soon as Hollywood releases a bunch of geek-friendly movies "only on Blu-Ray", that'll be the end of the effectiveness of the DRM.
Right now it sort of looks like Blu-Ray is winning because it's an active battle. But as I understand BD+, that battle can't go on forever. Once the entire virtual machine has been figured out, it's all over for the protection side. Furthermore, even if that isn't the case, each release is in itself a stationary target. So each will be cracked eventually. If Hollywood only cares about first-mover advantage, that won't bother them. But I think they're too greedy for that.
One of those methods is within my power. The other is not. I choose the one within my power. Freedom shouldn't only be for the charismatic and politically connected.
From Wikipedia, I have
UTAustin: 1966, 14 deaths
CSU Fullerton: 1976, 7 deaths
Cleveland School: 1991, 6 deaths
University of Iowa: 1991, 6 deaths
Lindhurst High School: 1992, 4 deaths
Frontier Middle School: 1996, 3 deaths
Heath High School: 1997, 3 deaths
Westside Middle School: 1998, 5 deaths
Columbine: 1999, 15 deaths
Appalacahian School of Law: 2002, 3 deaths
Red Lake: 2005, 8 deaths
Nickel Mines: 2006, 6 deaths
Virginia Tech: 2007, 33 deaths
North Illinois University: 2008, 6 deaths
Note that 5 are before your watershed year of 1996, not just one. That's the US, but adding in the rest of the world doesn't support your figures either.
Just the opposite. If there were no used games, they could jack up the price on new games even higher, knowing that gamers wouldn't have the option of buying a used game instead. Simple economics -- restrict the supply of a substitute and you can raise the price give the same demand.
I'll have even less of a pain in my conscience when I don't buy them. And when that DRM starts screwing up the experience of new purchasers, I'll have myself a great big belly laugh.
Sorry. The only people who make serious money in the video game industry are the big guys, just like any other industry. But in the video game industry, since the little guys really WANT to be there, the big guys take even more advantage of them and make them work longer hours at lower wages.
The special status of the Post Office was not at issue in the mail order case.
Which means the affiliate is responsible for collecting sales tax on anything the affiliate sells.
"Tax avoidance" isn't even illegal -- it refers to structuring your business so as to owe a minimum of tax. And Amazon isn't responsible for providing the mechanism for collection and reporting of sales tax for their affiliates. They couldn't even if they wanted to; the affiliates are independent businesses, not subsidiaries.
I'm not sure why this is "insightful". Glued together rocks -- that is, mortared stone -- are a proven building technology. Sure, if you want a big building, steel frame is a better choice. And wood frame is cheaper for the smaller stuff. But those glued-together rocks have their advantages.
The stuff I buy at the grocery store rarely lasts a week. Should we charge farmers for sewage plants?
A big theme in the DRM threads is that once you buy something, it is yours to do as your please. The necessary flip side of that is that it is your responsibility after that -- not the manufacturer's, and not whoever you bought it from. Making manufacturers responsible for ultimate disposal necessarily gives them an interest in control of the device throughout it's lifecycle. And that's a bad thing.
Wrong, as with most of the rest of your post. There is no such "reimbursement". If a resident of Maryland physically goes to Pennsylvania and buys something, the sales tax on the transaction is owed to Pennsylvania. There is no reimbursement, even if Maryland also demands a "use tax" on the item.
The Supreme Court decided some time ago (in a mail order case, not an Internet case) that companies could not be required to collect sales taxes for states in which they did not have a "nexus". It's not a matter of a "tax holiday" or of Congress sitting on their behind; Congress has no obligation to act for the states in this matter. It's not a matter of enforcing state law. It's a matter of states trying to widen the definition of that "nexus" beyond what the courts have accepted in the past. It probably won't work, but Amazon isn't willing to get into a court battle over it. Newegg, on the other hand, after initially collecting New York tax, ceased doing so after consulting their lawyers. NY has apparently not taken them up on the challenge.
It's crazy but it just might work. Not very quickly though.
Maybe, and maybe not. The reason the court distinguished transmissions made from a single copy and transmissions made from multiple copies is that "...the source material of the transmission-limit[s] the potential audience of a transmission in this case and [is] therefore germane in determining whether that transmission is made 'to the public'". Since it is the effect of having unique copies assigned to a particular customer, and not the actual mechanical fact which is at issue, it's conceivable that a court would rule that a system which behaved as if there were multiple copies, even when only one physical copy existed, would also not be infringing.
Lithium ion cells are standardized. Rebuilding the batteries by opening the casing and replacing the cells is often possible. But lithium-polymer cells are a different story; in order to use every bit of space inside the battery or device, the cells are shaped to fit it. So it really IS difficult to implement.