Just what can you reasonably expect? Most programmers have been emotionally hurt repeatedly by women (much fewer by men) so it is natural they form protective shells (no not `bash`, the other kind). Yes, that does tar all women with one brush but all men are equally tarred by the misbehaviours of a small minority.
As for discrimination, I personally consider it cowardly -- fair competition, and let the best [wo]man win.
append fake_ACPI=2 to wherever your kernel command-line hides. At least this is easily done and more importantly, people can know it might help.
Whether Linus will accept another switch is a totally different question -- Does his famous "The kernel will not cater for broken hardware" extend to BIOS firmware?
Anyone who uses force and evades investigation, responsibility and punishment is indistinguishable from a criminal.
I fear many LEOs have forgotten their job is not to catch bad guys but to create respect for the law by enforcing it impartially and in a manner seen by all to be correct.
Some BundesBeamter (German official clerks) are confused between communications means and content providers. Google and Facebook are end-point attractions, not means of communication. They are far more like newspapers than delivery routes. At the limit, they might be considered messaging services and regulated like a post office or parcel carriers.
Odd how all these errors are always in "their" favor and never in ours. As such they cannot be random mistakes.
de jure, perhaps no immunity especially for bribery. de facto, lots for anything remotely resembling official discretion. Trials like TX exGov Perry's are vanishingly rare (and this one appears motivated by prosecutorial animus.)
The question of what is parody / satire cannot be easy to answer. I would suggest a simple test: "Are the copyright owners likely to produce a similar work?" alongside the Trademark question ("Are people confused?")
What I recall of the Power Rangers is cheezy, plasticy schlock aimed at kids. This seems very different, so may qualify as parody/satire.
There is an ancient concept called "sovereign immunity" which holds that rulers (people making laws) are automatically exempt from those laws. The theory is they would carve exemptions for themselves if it weren't so wordy or otherwise onerous (requiring foresight). To be sure, this self-justifying concept is very attractive! Free-riders include some enforcers of the law (police). Small wonder that Hillary behaves as "rules are for the little people."
However, the concept belongs to fealty and other power politics. It has no place in a democracy, and still less in the US which explicity rejects individual titles and power. Everyone is supposed to be equal before the laws, and have laws enforced uniformly. As it is now, "color of law" is near-immunity from it. We do not have a democracy but elected/appointed dictatorships, fortunately still fragmented.
2) NTIA may well help manage spectrum, and the Feds certainly can use their reserved spectrum however they wish. But that does not grant them immunity to use any spectrum they wish, however they wish. Carriers (and their customers) have paid dearly for that spectrum which gives it many of the characteristics of private property. There certainly is a well-established expectation of privacy. (This is supposed to be a nation of laws not lawmen.)
Is this StingRay thing even FCC licenced? What about the operators?
Looks like it performs indiscriminate MiTM attacks. Particularly egregious, since it could probably be tuned with software to only intercept those EEIDs for which a warrent was issued.
No time for a warrent? Then how did the device magically appear on-scene? It was called-out, and so could a warrent be.
Not that I approve of the individual or his "business", but he is essentially throwing the shoe on the other foot -- accusing others of what he is accused of. Of course it may be more greenmail, or we will have to endure a ruling (summary judgement likely) on exactly who is "a public figure".
He is not [yet] a convict, politician or other entertainer who might be said to have voluntarily exposed their persona to the public. He, much like his victims, would rather remain private. The serious question is whether Google etal had a right to dox him or whether their stories would have had equal weight without the personal identification. And precisely how he is legally distinguishable from his victims.
I looked at these NUC, but happily settled on the ECS LIVA. It doesn't have SATA, but the USB3 works and the internal 32 SSD is fast enough. Alot less $$$.
I run mine caseless, and it is really like a x86_64 RPi (even the RPi2 is not fast enough to run even chrome).
Congrats to the defense team for spotting this hole in the prosecution. Public defenders are not as bad as the media portray.
I'm not sure why the cop tech was not hit with fines & jail for contempt of court. No private agreement (even with FBI) trumps civil let alone criminal discovery. The DA probably settled to avoid the FBI repo'ing the Stingray (it was likely on loan).
You might be right or you might be wrong: Most places, traffic entering an intersection on the green must yield to traffic already in the intersection. That would include yielding to a pedestrian who got half-way across unless the crosswalk was clearly two-phases (London), usually with railings.
Of course smart pedestrians expect aggressive drivers. And smart drivers know better than to blow through fresh greens.
Man is at the top of planetary food-chains (neglecting the microbial predators). So he preys upon himself (aggression).
Excessive aggression is obviously sub-optimal with too much productive resources diverted to defense. Insufficient aggression might also be sub-optimal by increasing episodic payoffs ("jackpots") to renaissant aggression (classic predator-prey population cycling).
If you cannot totally eliminate aggression, then you should find an optimum lest it return with a vengence.
If there is a optical problem, why not solve it rather than trying to get software to (maybe) compensate and eat up battery life?
Just design aspheric lenses specifically for the headsets. Yes, the injection molds might be a bit more complex, but I believe these have to be CNC anyways. A bit more setup, but no production cost increase.
That's fine, anyone is free to leave at any time. The oblique reference to Godwin doesn't work, this is just the same sort of ad-hominem that Godwin rejects.
I'm not sure FIJA is the only or main problem in US criminal justice, but _something_is_: why can US DAs routinely get 90+% convictions whilst UK Crown Prosecutors struggle to get 70%? US with substantially higher incarceration rates, no less! UK cops or barristers sloppyier? UK crooks cagier? Absent some other explanation, I put it down to cowed US juries.
How could they be expected to? They were not informed. The whole legal process from summons to instruction is designed to weed out independent thinkers from juries and intimidate those who are seated. This undermines an important protection.
Perhaps you are confunding "states nullification" of unconstitutional laws with "jury nullification" that is much broader, and is for any case where application of the law could lead to an unjust result. No one expect a jury to be constitutional experts, while state legislatures might have such expertise.
It turns very much on the question of what level of knowledge reachs the level of criminal "knowingly". Did he monitor transactions in real-time and encourage (cut fees) on some? Police profit (civil forfeiture) and so do cell-providers (burners).
An ethical DA would have put nullification directly in front of the jury, for them to decide. But too many of ours have corrupt drive to win. Fewer in the UK (for now).
If ever there was a case that cried out for JURY NULLIFICATION by fully informed juries, this is it.
He and his Silk Road may have been helping illegal activities to some extent. The persecutors [sic] certainly thought so. As do the police when they bust competitors. But a jury has the right to examine both law and facts, in this case to determine whether the help performed was actually criminal, no matter what the law said.
In refusing to thoroughly instruct the jury, the judge tampered with it! Just because SCOTUS has ruled nullification does not _have_ be to instructed does not mean it should not be.
We hardly know everything that is in gasoline (about a hundred compounds, mostly C4-C9 isomers). Jet fuel is more complex and diesel (C10-C20) is just too far gone.
Why would you expect to know the exact isomers (and recemization) in a fluorinated organic? The fluorine will go on in various places. And even if you think you know, it will change once thermally cracked at fire temperatures.
Mostly harmless, but there will be the odd one with just the wrong geometry to do somethink nasty, like the way BPA binds estrogen receptors.
PV=nRT : A ball that is found at 10.5 psig (25.2 psia) at 35'F will be at the regulation minimum pressure 12.5 psig at 74'F. Perfectly reasonable.
The non-idealities are red-herrings: deviations for Ideal Gas Law are tiny (10ppm?) at this low a pressure and warm a temperature (relative to critical for nitrogen & oxygen). Cold leather shrinks the football pressure boundary, increasing pressure. Condensation might drop pressure 0.5 psi further if the fill-air was saturated from a steamy locker room or grunting ball-boy exhale.
The point is, this doesn't take a PhD. In fact, a pHd may be too focussed and miss something like the condensation.
Yes, this is DOA to a Republican Congress. As for rhetorical [d]effectiveness, please consider the irony of the Feds trying to impose a property tax or alternatively an ex-post facto law (retroactively taxing past earnings.)
If a former professor of Constitutional Law could shred it without so much as a passing mention, what does that say about the man's character?
Slashdot Mirror
Did [m]any in their youth? Human behaviour is not a state function, it is path-dependant.
No, `crosh` is a protective shell.
Just what can you reasonably expect? Most programmers have been emotionally hurt repeatedly by women (much fewer by men) so it is natural they form protective shells (no not `bash`, the other kind). Yes, that does tar all women with one brush but all men are equally tarred by the misbehaviours of a small minority.
As for discrimination, I personally consider it cowardly -- fair competition, and let the best [wo]man win.
append fake_ACPI=2 to wherever your kernel command-line hides. At least this is easily done and more importantly, people can know it might help.
Whether Linus will accept another switch is a totally different question -- Does his famous "The kernel will not cater for broken hardware" extend to BIOS firmware?
Anyone who uses force and evades investigation, responsibility and punishment is indistinguishable from a criminal.
I fear many LEOs have forgotten their job is not to catch bad guys but to create respect for the law by enforcing it impartially and in a manner seen by all to be correct.
Some BundesBeamter (German official clerks) are confused between communications means and content providers. Google and Facebook are end-point attractions, not means of communication. They are far more like newspapers than delivery routes. At the limit, they might be considered messaging services and regulated like a post office or parcel carriers.
Odd how all these errors are always in "their" favor and never in ours. As such they cannot be random mistakes.
de jure, perhaps no immunity especially for bribery. de facto, lots for anything remotely resembling official discretion. Trials like TX exGov Perry's are vanishingly rare (and this one appears motivated by prosecutorial animus.)
The question of what is parody / satire cannot be easy to answer. I would suggest a simple test: "Are the copyright owners likely to produce a similar work?" alongside the Trademark question ("Are people confused?")
What I recall of the Power Rangers is cheezy, plasticy schlock aimed at kids. This seems very different, so may qualify as parody/satire.
There is an ancient concept called "sovereign immunity" which holds that rulers (people making laws) are automatically exempt from those laws. The theory is they would carve exemptions for themselves if it weren't so wordy or otherwise onerous (requiring foresight). To be sure, this self-justifying concept is very attractive! Free-riders include some enforcers of the law (police). Small wonder that Hillary behaves as "rules are for the little people."
However, the concept belongs to fealty and other power politics. It has no place in a democracy, and still less in the US which explicity rejects individual titles and power. Everyone is supposed to be equal before the laws, and have laws enforced uniformly. As it is now, "color of law" is near-immunity from it. We do not have a democracy but elected/appointed dictatorships, fortunately still fragmented.
2) NTIA may well help manage spectrum, and the Feds certainly can use their reserved spectrum however they wish. But that does not grant them immunity to use any spectrum they wish, however they wish. Carriers (and their customers) have paid dearly for that spectrum which gives it many of the characteristics of private property. There certainly is a well-established expectation of privacy. (This is supposed to be a nation of laws not lawmen.)
Is this StingRay thing even FCC licenced? What about the operators?
Looks like it performs indiscriminate MiTM attacks. Particularly egregious, since it could probably be tuned with software to only intercept those EEIDs for which a warrent was issued.
No time for a warrent? Then how did the device magically appear on-scene? It was called-out, and so could a warrent be.
Not that I approve of the individual or his "business", but he is essentially throwing the shoe on the other foot -- accusing others of what he is accused of. Of course it may be more greenmail, or we will have to endure a ruling (summary judgement likely) on exactly who is "a public figure".
He is not [yet] a convict, politician or other entertainer who might be said to have voluntarily exposed their persona to the public. He, much like his victims, would rather remain private. The serious question is whether Google etal had a right to dox him or whether their stories would have had equal weight without the personal identification. And precisely how he is legally distinguishable from his victims.
I looked at these NUC, but happily settled on the ECS LIVA. It doesn't have SATA, but the USB3 works and the internal 32 SSD is fast enough. Alot less $$$.
I run mine caseless, and it is really like a x86_64 RPi (even the RPi2 is not fast enough to run even chrome).
Congrats to the defense team for spotting this hole in the prosecution. Public defenders are not as bad as the media portray.
I'm not sure why the cop tech was not hit with fines & jail for contempt of court. No private agreement (even with FBI) trumps civil let alone criminal discovery. The DA probably settled to avoid the FBI repo'ing the Stingray (it was likely on loan).
You might be right or you might be wrong: Most places, traffic entering an intersection on the green must yield to traffic already in the intersection. That would include yielding to a pedestrian who got half-way across unless the crosswalk was clearly two-phases (London), usually with railings.
Of course smart pedestrians expect aggressive drivers. And smart drivers know better than to blow through fresh greens.
Man is at the top of planetary food-chains (neglecting the microbial predators). So he preys upon himself (aggression).
Excessive aggression is obviously sub-optimal with too much productive resources diverted to defense. Insufficient aggression might also be sub-optimal by increasing episodic payoffs ("jackpots") to renaissant aggression (classic predator-prey population cycling).
If you cannot totally eliminate aggression, then you should find an optimum lest it return with a vengence.
If there is a optical problem, why not solve it rather than trying to get software to (maybe) compensate and eat up battery life?
Just design aspheric lenses specifically for the headsets. Yes, the injection molds might be a bit more complex, but I believe these have to be CNC anyways. A bit more setup, but no production cost increase.
... and the failover was a Raspberry Pi model A. Ample :)
Serious, this is the first prime-time multi-hour outage I can recall in 17 years. Far better than most sites!
That's fine, anyone is free to leave at any time. The oblique reference to Godwin doesn't work, this is just the same sort of ad-hominem that Godwin rejects.
I'm not sure FIJA is the only or main problem in US criminal justice, but _something_is_: why can US DAs routinely get 90+% convictions whilst UK Crown Prosecutors struggle to get 70%? US with substantially higher incarceration rates, no less! UK cops or barristers sloppyier? UK crooks cagier? Absent some other explanation, I put it down to cowed US juries.
How could they be expected to? They were not informed. The whole legal process from summons to instruction is designed to weed out independent thinkers from juries and intimidate those who are seated. This undermines an important protection.
Perhaps you are confunding "states nullification" of unconstitutional laws with "jury nullification" that is much broader, and is for any case where application of the law could lead to an unjust result. No one expect a jury to be constitutional experts, while state legislatures might have such expertise.
It turns very much on the question of what level of knowledge reachs the level of criminal "knowingly". Did he monitor transactions in real-time and encourage (cut fees) on some? Police profit (civil forfeiture) and so do cell-providers (burners).
An ethical DA would have put nullification directly in front of the jury, for them to decide. But too many of ours have corrupt drive to win. Fewer in the UK (for now).
If ever there was a case that cried out for JURY NULLIFICATION by fully informed juries, this is it.
He and his Silk Road may have been helping illegal activities to some extent. The persecutors [sic] certainly thought so. As do the police when they bust competitors. But a jury has the right to examine both law and facts, in this case to determine whether the help performed was actually criminal, no matter what the law said.
In refusing to thoroughly instruct the jury, the judge tampered with it! Just because SCOTUS has ruled nullification does not _have_ be to instructed does not mean it should not be.
We hardly know everything that is in gasoline (about a hundred compounds, mostly C4-C9 isomers). Jet fuel is more complex and diesel (C10-C20) is just too far gone.
Why would you expect to know the exact isomers (and recemization) in a fluorinated organic? The fluorine will go on in various places. And even if you think you know, it will change once thermally cracked at fire temperatures.
Mostly harmless, but there will be the odd one with just the wrong geometry to do somethink nasty, like the way BPA binds estrogen receptors.
PV=nRT : A ball that is found at 10.5 psig (25.2 psia) at 35'F will be at the regulation minimum pressure 12.5 psig at 74'F. Perfectly reasonable.
The non-idealities are red-herrings: deviations for Ideal Gas Law are tiny (10ppm?) at this low a pressure and warm a temperature (relative to critical for nitrogen & oxygen). Cold leather shrinks the football pressure boundary, increasing pressure. Condensation might drop pressure 0.5 psi further if the fill-air was saturated from a steamy locker room or grunting ball-boy exhale.
The point is, this doesn't take a PhD. In fact, a pHd may be too focussed and miss something like the condensation.
Yes, this is DOA to a Republican Congress. As for rhetorical [d]effectiveness, please consider the irony of the Feds trying to impose a property tax or alternatively an ex-post facto law (retroactively taxing past earnings.)
If a former professor of Constitutional Law could shred it without so much as a passing mention, what does that say about the man's character?