The short version: "So why did we invade Iraq, really?" If I had an interview with him, that's what I'd ask. And I'd keep asking it until he'd exhausted his BS answers, and finally got to the truth.
They'll care if the result is some combination of:
1. Attorney's fees awarded to the defendant.
2. Sanctions for attempting to prevent defendants in other suits from taking advantage of their constitutional right to legal counsel.
3. A successful countersuit by Syfert.
Let's hope the judge they end up with sees the situation for what it is.
And where was the device you used to make your post made?
That's the thing: It's not just the cheap plastic crap that's being made in countries with little-to-no environmental regulations. It's basically all consumer goods.
Of course my argument is completely bogus - that was the point. The "(No, I'm not being serious)" was to indicate that I was aware of all the problems you mentioned, and was making an attempt at satirizing exactly the stupidity you describe.
After all, it's much warmer where I am right now than it was at the same time 4 years ago. 4 years ago in my region, we had a blizzard on Thanksgiving. This year, it's about 50F. Clearly, the globe is warming uncontrollably, and since we all know CO2 emissions are causing climate change, CO2 emissions must have gone up.
They don't have to be actually capable of being useful in attacking Linux or open source. They just have to perceived as being useful to a friendly judge who allows the case to go forward.
I for one would be wondering whether this move was intended to acquire the Unix copyrights that Novell owns (as determined by the SCO case). The idea here is that SCO was stopped largely because they didn't actually have copyright on what they claimed infringement for.
Not that there weren't lots of other reasons why the case didn't hold water, but this does look like potentially a way to get the whole thing started up again.
I mentioned this on the last TSA thread, but it bears repeating: In fact, campaign contributions were unnecessary for this, because the DHS Secretary Michael Chertoff who started this move had significant investments manufacturer of the naked-scan machines.
It sounds like what commodore64_love is suggesting is making the decision entirely on source and destination IP address. If some destination IP attempts to receive more bits per second than their advertised download rate, drop packets until they aren't getting faster throughput. If some source IP attempts to send more bits per second than their advertised upload rate, drop packets until they aren't getting faster throughput.
If those aren't technically feasible, then the advertising needs to change to match what is technically feasible.
But I agree that its possible for them to lose control over the cashflow that Android generates, which is quite a different thing.
That's the thing about the business press - they think of the cash flow as the goal of any company's product, not the product itself. As geeks, we're more interested in the "Wow, 16Gb RAM the size of a potato chip!" But for business folks, that doesn't matter unless it is possible to make big bucks making and selling them.
The most common way to disprove an economic theory is to put the policy into place and observe that the predicted result doesn't happen.
For instance, if you try to introduce a 'trickle-down' effect for 30 years and the median wages don't go up, it's safe to say that 'trickle-down' doesn't happen. Or if you think that lowering tax rates will increase tax revenue, you try it for a few decades, and tax revenues go down, you can pretty easily discredit that theory as well.
Forget no-bid contracts, Dick Cheney admitted to war crimes on national television. Any civilized country would have arrested that guy and brought him to trial.
If you're wondering who defined the ordering of waterboarding as a war crime, the answer is that the US did, right after WWII, where Japanese officials were arrested, tried, and in some cases killed for ordering waterboarding of prisoners.
I don't know about you, but I don't consider an M-16 to be a way of feeling safer. It might make things actually safer, but it wouldn't feel safer.
It's not that I think the Marines would intentionally shoot ordinary citizens. It's that the more weapons are involved, the more likely it is that I'll be hit by something not aimed at me.
There are 3 problems with your argument: 1. Jose Padilla was an American citizen arrested in O'Hare Airport. He was treated like an enemy combatant, including being placed in military prison for several years without trial.
2. All of the 9/11 hijackers were legal resident aliens of the United States.
3. There's a standard process for dealing with a person from another country accused of committing a crime in your country: requesting extradition. The other country will either say yes or no. Typically, saying no does not trigger war. For instance, the Roman Polanksi case.
You laugh, but there are a surprisingly large number of people who really don't believe in democracy. And a lot of them aren't in China.
Many of them think that they are part of the privileged minority. Others think they have a good chance of becoming part of the privileged minority and want to make sure they'll be on top when they get there. Others have been convinced that the privileged minority will improve the lives of the non-privileged majority. Others think that they need to be willing to sacrifice their democratic rights in order to keep the ideals that they believe in alive.
Heck, not even Socrates thought a democracy would yield just results (and in his case at least, he was probably right).
That wasn't meant to be 100% accurate code (I haven't written production C for a while now), just an approximate demonstration of what you could do.
If I were doing the real thing, I'd probably do a fork and set the child process to exec something nice and useless like 'dd if=/dev/urandom of=/dev/null'.
"My fellow Earthicans, we enjoy so much freedom it's almost sickening. We're free to choose which hand our sex-monitoring chip is implanted in. And if we don't want to pay our taxes, why, we're free to spend a weekend with the Pain Monster." - Richard Nixon's Head
On a similar note, my dad used to teach high school math, and as a rule had multiple versions of his exams. One day, he handed out his test as usual, and shortly afterwords one of the kids raised his hand and announced "Mike's test is different than mine!"
In criminal justice, the defendant least willing to engage in plea bargaining is usually the one who believes he has committed no crime. Here, where the stakes are far lower, I'd also expect non-cheaters to first off not think they'd be falsely accused, and defend themselves if they do get accused.
Ex post facto is an important concept here. When you gave consent, you gave consent, which makes the sex not rape, by definition. That you might have been stupid to do so doesn't mean that you can retroactively revoke your consent. And this is an important issue with this particular crime, because there have been rape cases that have turned out to be simply a case of morning-after regrets.
Which of course brings me to an important lesson: If you're going to sleep with someone, either wear a condom or demand they get tested for HIV.
I thought Woz and Jobs got along pretty well even now, but I can't imagine this sort of thing making their relationship any better.
And I hope Woz is wrong, and no company "wins" the phone OS wars, because if somebody wins, then eventually they'll become a monopoly and all the consumers will lose.
Slashdot Mirror
The short version: "So why did we invade Iraq, really?" If I had an interview with him, that's what I'd ask. And I'd keep asking it until he'd exhausted his BS answers, and finally got to the truth.
They'll care if the result is some combination of:
1. Attorney's fees awarded to the defendant.
2. Sanctions for attempting to prevent defendants in other suits from taking advantage of their constitutional right to legal counsel.
3. A successful countersuit by Syfert.
Let's hope the judge they end up with sees the situation for what it is.
And where was the device you used to make your post made?
That's the thing: It's not just the cheap plastic crap that's being made in countries with little-to-no environmental regulations. It's basically all consumer goods.
Wise words from Michael Harrison, of 2686 Hugh St, Parkersburg WV 26101, SSN 263-20-5830.
Of course my argument is completely bogus - that was the point. The "(No, I'm not being serious)" was to indicate that I was aware of all the problems you mentioned, and was making an attempt at satirizing exactly the stupidity you describe.
After all, it's much warmer where I am right now than it was at the same time 4 years ago. 4 years ago in my region, we had a blizzard on Thanksgiving. This year, it's about 50F. Clearly, the globe is warming uncontrollably, and since we all know CO2 emissions are causing climate change, CO2 emissions must have gone up.
(No, I'm not being serious)
They don't have to be actually capable of being useful in attacking Linux or open source. They just have to perceived as being useful to a friendly judge who allows the case to go forward.
I for one would be wondering whether this move was intended to acquire the Unix copyrights that Novell owns (as determined by the SCO case). The idea here is that SCO was stopped largely because they didn't actually have copyright on what they claimed infringement for.
Not that there weren't lots of other reasons why the case didn't hold water, but this does look like potentially a way to get the whole thing started up again.
I mentioned this on the last TSA thread, but it bears repeating: In fact, campaign contributions were unnecessary for this, because the DHS Secretary Michael Chertoff who started this move had significant investments manufacturer of the naked-scan machines.
It sounds like what commodore64_love is suggesting is making the decision entirely on source and destination IP address. If some destination IP attempts to receive more bits per second than their advertised download rate, drop packets until they aren't getting faster throughput. If some source IP attempts to send more bits per second than their advertised upload rate, drop packets until they aren't getting faster throughput.
If those aren't technically feasible, then the advertising needs to change to match what is technically feasible.
But I agree that its possible for them to lose control over the cashflow that Android generates, which is quite a different thing.
That's the thing about the business press - they think of the cash flow as the goal of any company's product, not the product itself. As geeks, we're more interested in the "Wow, 16Gb RAM the size of a potato chip!" But for business folks, that doesn't matter unless it is possible to make big bucks making and selling them.
The most common way to disprove an economic theory is to put the policy into place and observe that the predicted result doesn't happen.
For instance, if you try to introduce a 'trickle-down' effect for 30 years and the median wages don't go up, it's safe to say that 'trickle-down' doesn't happen. Or if you think that lowering tax rates will increase tax revenue, you try it for a few decades, and tax revenues go down, you can pretty easily discredit that theory as well.
Forget no-bid contracts, Dick Cheney admitted to war crimes on national television. Any civilized country would have arrested that guy and brought him to trial.
If you're wondering who defined the ordering of waterboarding as a war crime, the answer is that the US did, right after WWII, where Japanese officials were arrested, tried, and in some cases killed for ordering waterboarding of prisoners.
I don't know about you, but I don't consider an M-16 to be a way of feeling safer. It might make things actually safer, but it wouldn't feel safer.
It's not that I think the Marines would intentionally shoot ordinary citizens. It's that the more weapons are involved, the more likely it is that I'll be hit by something not aimed at me.
There are 3 problems with your argument:
1. Jose Padilla was an American citizen arrested in O'Hare Airport. He was treated like an enemy combatant, including being placed in military prison for several years without trial.
2. All of the 9/11 hijackers were legal resident aliens of the United States.
3. There's a standard process for dealing with a person from another country accused of committing a crime in your country: requesting extradition. The other country will either say yes or no. Typically, saying no does not trigger war. For instance, the Roman Polanksi case.
You laugh, but there are a surprisingly large number of people who really don't believe in democracy. And a lot of them aren't in China.
Many of them think that they are part of the privileged minority. Others think they have a good chance of becoming part of the privileged minority and want to make sure they'll be on top when they get there. Others have been convinced that the privileged minority will improve the lives of the non-privileged majority. Others think that they need to be willing to sacrifice their democratic rights in order to keep the ideals that they believe in alive.
Heck, not even Socrates thought a democracy would yield just results (and in his case at least, he was probably right).
That wasn't meant to be 100% accurate code (I haven't written production C for a while now), just an approximate demonstration of what you could do.
If I were doing the real thing, I'd probably do a fork and set the child process to exec something nice and useless like 'dd if=/dev/urandom of=/dev/null'.
Quoth Deep Thought: "The SGI Challenge DM - A mere abacus, mention it not."
I've got something a bit better here:
while(1) {
system.exec('yes');
}
That way, instead of 1 infinite process doing nothing, you spin up an infinite number of infinite processes doing basically nothing.
"My fellow Earthicans, we enjoy so much freedom it's almost sickening. We're free to choose which hand our sex-monitoring chip is implanted in. And if we don't want to pay our taxes, why, we're free to spend a weekend with the Pain Monster."
- Richard Nixon's Head
Safe to say this is where we're heading.
That's what they really meant to say. Or actually, "I know the Wii was interesting but now out-of-date, but don't lose your loyalty to Nintendo."
On a similar note, my dad used to teach high school math, and as a rule had multiple versions of his exams. One day, he handed out his test as usual, and shortly afterwords one of the kids raised his hand and announced "Mike's test is different than mine!"
Unlikely.
In criminal justice, the defendant least willing to engage in plea bargaining is usually the one who believes he has committed no crime. Here, where the stakes are far lower, I'd also expect non-cheaters to first off not think they'd be falsely accused, and defend themselves if they do get accused.
Ex post facto is an important concept here. When you gave consent, you gave consent, which makes the sex not rape, by definition. That you might have been stupid to do so doesn't mean that you can retroactively revoke your consent. And this is an important issue with this particular crime, because there have been rape cases that have turned out to be simply a case of morning-after regrets.
Which of course brings me to an important lesson: If you're going to sleep with someone, either wear a condom or demand they get tested for HIV.
I thought Woz and Jobs got along pretty well even now, but I can't imagine this sort of thing making their relationship any better.
And I hope Woz is wrong, and no company "wins" the phone OS wars, because if somebody wins, then eventually they'll become a monopoly and all the consumers will lose.