"The process of confiscating bootleg CDs from street vendors is exactly what the RIAA should be doing," said Jason Schultz, a staff attorney for the San Francisco-based Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF).
No. Confiscation should be left up to the courts. The RIAA should, if it feels it has a valid complaint, report it to the authorities. Confiscation, by a corporation or private individual, should never be allowed. At the point they are doing this, nothing has been proven in a court of law. Due process, people.
I bought a 50-pack of Sony disks. The first 5 i tried (4 off the top and 1 out of the middle) would not record. After a little bit of arguing, the store refunded my money.
For those of you who have text display radios...and those who will.
Be prepared for ads for your local bank to go along with the 'artiste' and track title to go in that LCD space. You can be assured that the radio station (local/digital/satellite) will sell that space if/when they can.
Temporary works quite well in many military situations. And the length of temporary differs. Having a 36 hour advantage for a particular system may be all that's needed. Other systems may rely on years of advantage.
There are many systems and weapons kept secret, but still in use. The knowledge of exactly how it works would negate any advantage.
For instance...there is a class of A/A missile that does X. Somewhat revolutionary in operation. Been in the field for several years. If its internal operation were public, well, then, it wouldn't be secret anymore. And defeating it would be trivial. As it is, the general aspects are probably known. But until you can glean the exact parameters...defeating it is very hard.
Open Source systems (bazaar) are often much more stable than commercial systems (cathedral) just because of the number of bug hunters, and when it comes to military apps, stability is absolutely crucial. Would you really want your military systems to blue screen or dump core right in the middle of a firefight?
Conversely, would you want all your image recognition algorithms (for TV guided missiles), your IR decoy rejection routines, your frequency hopping timings to be known to all and sundry, including the adversary?
"Look, {insert your favorite rebel army leader here]...here's the code for how the missile rejects the decoy flares. Now we can work around that." "ooohhh, and here's the Predator communications frequencies. We can start on spoofing those."
It's just you. The aircraft are of a similar size, but not, not even close. Notice the delta wing, the canards, the twin intakes.
Re:The same physics still applies
on
Lonely Planets
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
It seems unlikely that something as small as an ant could develop human-level intelligence and with it, human-level technology. The scale is too small. Try sustaining an ant-scale fire for an ant-scale blacksmith, for example.
We may not recognise that 'intelligence'. Is a termite colony intelligent? According to us, no. But some species of termite build incredible structures. All without blueprints, a controlling boss, etc. On a scale and complexity to rival skyscrapers.
Alien Developer: "We found a new source for that stuff we've been looking for. This planet here." Developer Two: "Anything interesting there?" One: "Naaa....just some cabon based individual life forms. They've built a few interesting structures, but they're not truly intelligent."
Two: "Ok...let's put in the proposal"
Human level intelligence may not be the pinnacle. We only have one data point to work with. Ok, two, if you count dolphins. 3, if you count some of the other primates. And we still eat those on occasion.
"They" wouldn't have to destroy the actual planet to make it uncomfortable for us.
Re:Either way is scary
on
Lonely Planets
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
many = hundreds/thousands.
Personally, I too believe there are other life forms out there. Some of them even intelligent.
If conditions exist that there can be one intelligent species (and it does--us), then it should follow that similar conditions will exist elsewhere. There are far too many stars/planets out there for it not to. This planet does not appear to be that unique.
As far as colonization on a mass scale, I don't think so. The distances are too great to hold any societal structure together (At least as we know it).
Either way is scary
on
Lonely Planets
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
Either we are truly alone in the universe. There are zero other 'intelligent' lifeforms out there. Anywhere. We are absolutely alone.
Or, there are others. If there are >0 other 'intelligent' lifeforms, then presumably there should be many others. And some of those will not be very friendly. Or even if not friendly, we might be so far below their notice as to be paved over for a new bypass, without them noticing. Does the bulldozer driver notice the anthill he just smoothed over?
Yeah. I SHOULDN'T come over and take your car, but hey, I'm not hurting anyone, am I?
Seriously...I'd like to hear an actual, valid justification for being allowed to do this.
But I could say the same thing about my classmates. They're smart engineers (or whatever). The more of them there are, the less I'll get paid. They're depriving me of MY money. I want a law passed against them.
Now doesn't that sound stupid?
Yes, it does. There is no such thing as your money, until you earn it. You haven't earned anything. You want more money? Be better than them. Or join forces, and start up your own company. Then you can give away all your company assets to anyone who cares.
Assuming you have a current Windows box around, activate the Windows Update Catalog part of Windows Update. You can select which OS you want to get updates/critical patches for.
The Win98 & SE updates weigh in at ~165MB, not incl. all the foreign language versions.
WHAT?!?! Kiss my ass. 6 months is jail is NOT lax! I don't want to spend 6 hours in the custody of the state.
[queue theme music from Baretta] Simple solution to avoid that. Don't bring your camcorder to the movie theater, with the intention of taping the movie.
There. That was easy, wasn't it?
First offense drunk drivers don't get 6 months in jail in Ohio.
How much you wanna bet first time offenders of this don't get 6 months either
Not sure what you're asking for here. The restriction exists because otherwise, the wings would bend and ultimately break. If you need to bug out fast, and need max turn rate, you jettison the external weapons and do what you need to do.
Plus, the newer aircraft need to be restricted because they can actually turn harder than the pilot can endure. A unmanned, unloaded, remote control -16 or -18 (if such a thing existed) could probably pull 12 or more G routinely. A pilot cannot do that more than once.
...ok , if you dont find a way within the next minute to turn it off then we torture...
And the passengers are doing what, during this scenario? The pre-9/11 hijacking mindset is no more. Any terrorist type activity, and the hundred or so passengers will rush the perp(s).
If you need to put your 747 into an Immelmann or Split-S, just make sure you're not doing it into a mountain -- because the computer won't let you.
Fly by wire already does this. The aircraft is actually controlled by the computer. The pilot says 'turn left 10 deg'. The computer actually figures out how far to move the control surfaces, depending on alt, weight, speed, etc. It will not send the a/c into an Immelman.
Fighter aircraft are limited by the FCC in the same way. Limited to a specific turn or G rate depending on the load. An F-16 with 2 ea 2,000 lb bombs on the wing will not turn as hard as an F-16 with only missiles. No matter how hard the pilot wants it to.
the CD works better, because you don't have to flip it in the middle. Or, look for "Dark Side of the Rainbow" on your P2P of choice.
And yes, it rocks.
Vaporware is a 'never has been' Abandonware is a 'had it, but sold/disposed/threw it out'.
We know he had them, the UN knows he had them, *he* knew he had them. His Kurdish and Iranian victims certainly knew he had them.
Go back a few years and ask Al Gore about Saddams WMD's. Ask Hans Blix. Ask Tom Daschle. Jaques Chirac. John Kerry. Madeline Albright. See what they say. They were all campaigning hard to go to war, because we knew (or they told us) that Saddam had, and was building more, WMD's. Now, because Bush says the same things and actually does something about it, suddenly it's all a falsehood. An 'illegal war'. Why weren't you yelling "vaporware" when Clinton attacked with those cruise missiles?
The real question is...what happened to all that stuff? Did he, in fact, dispose of it? Well WTF didn't he provide unambiguous proof of that? Or is it merely buried out in the desert, like they did with some frontline aircraft.
"It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
--Sen Hillary Clinton, Oct 10, 2002 "If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
--President Bill Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998
Slashdot Mirror
It's all the same, no matter if government spends it on bombs or space rockets.
There is a difference. In the latter, not quite so many people die.
"The process of confiscating bootleg CDs from street vendors is exactly what the RIAA should be doing," said Jason Schultz, a staff attorney for the San Francisco-based Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF).
No. Confiscation should be left up to the courts. The RIAA should, if it feels it has a valid complaint, report it to the authorities. Confiscation, by a corporation or private individual, should never be allowed. At the point they are doing this, nothing has been proven in a court of law. Due process, people.
I bought a 50-pack of Sony disks. The first 5 i tried (4 off the top and 1 out of the middle) would not record. After a little bit of arguing, the store refunded my money.
In short: All this security at the airport is like the old adage.
"This rock in my hand keeps away all the lions."
"But there are no lions here."
"Exactly."
Or, as was said by the IRA after they tried to blow up Maggie Thatcher in Brighton:
"We have to be lucky once. You have to be lucky every time."
For those of you who have text display radios...and those who will.
Be prepared for ads for your local bank to go along with the 'artiste' and track title to go in that LCD space. You can be assured that the radio station (local/digital/satellite) will sell that space if/when they can.
Temporary works quite well in many military situations. And the length of temporary differs. Having a 36 hour advantage for a particular system may be all that's needed. Other systems may rely on years of advantage.
There are many systems and weapons kept secret, but still in use. The knowledge of exactly how it works would negate any advantage.
For instance...there is a class of A/A missile that does X. Somewhat revolutionary in operation. Been in the field for several years. If its internal operation were public, well, then, it wouldn't be secret anymore. And defeating it would be trivial. As it is, the general aspects are probably known. But until you can glean the exact parameters...defeating it is very hard.
Open Source systems (bazaar) are often much more stable than commercial systems (cathedral) just because of the number of bug hunters, and when it comes to military apps, stability is absolutely crucial. Would you really want your military systems to blue screen or dump core right in the middle of a firefight?
Conversely, would you want all your image recognition algorithms (for TV guided missiles), your IR decoy rejection routines, your frequency hopping timings to be known to all and sundry, including the adversary?
"Look, {insert your favorite rebel army leader here]...here's the code for how the missile rejects the decoy flares. Now we can work around that." "ooohhh, and here's the Predator communications frequencies. We can start on spoofing those."
All that means is you have idiot developers/managers. Which can and does happen with open source tools.
It's just you. The aircraft are of a similar size, but not, not even close. Notice the delta wing, the canards, the twin intakes.
It seems unlikely that something as small as an ant could develop human-level intelligence and with it, human-level technology. The scale is too small. Try sustaining an ant-scale fire for an ant-scale blacksmith, for example.
We may not recognise that 'intelligence'. Is a termite colony intelligent? According to us, no. But some species of termite build incredible structures. All without blueprints, a controlling boss, etc. On a scale and complexity to rival skyscrapers.
Alien Developer: "We found a new source for that stuff we've been looking for. This planet here."
Developer Two: "Anything interesting there?"
One: "Naaa....just some cabon based individual life forms. They've built a few interesting structures, but they're not truly intelligent."
Two: "Ok...let's put in the proposal"
Human level intelligence may not be the pinnacle. We only have one data point to work with. Ok, two, if you count dolphins. 3, if you count some of the other primates. And we still eat those on occasion.
"They" wouldn't have to destroy the actual planet to make it uncomfortable for us.
many = hundreds/thousands.
Personally, I too believe there are other life forms out there. Some of them even intelligent.
If conditions exist that there can be one intelligent species (and it does--us), then it should follow that similar conditions will exist elsewhere. There are far too many stars/planets out there for it not to. This planet does not appear to be that unique.
As far as colonization on a mass scale, I don't think so. The distances are too great to hold any societal structure together (At least as we know it).
Either we are truly alone in the universe. There are zero other 'intelligent' lifeforms out there. Anywhere. We are absolutely alone.
Or, there are others. If there are >0 other 'intelligent' lifeforms, then presumably there should be many others. And some of those will not be very friendly. Or even if not friendly, we might be so far below their notice as to be paved over for a new bypass, without them noticing. Does the bulldozer driver notice the anthill he just smoothed over?
Yeah. I SHOULDN'T come over and take your car, but hey, I'm not hurting anyone, am I?
Seriously...I'd like to hear an actual, valid justification for being allowed to do this.
But I could say the same thing about my classmates. They're smart engineers (or whatever). The more of them there are, the less I'll get paid. They're depriving me of MY money. I want a law passed against them.
Now doesn't that sound stupid?
Yes, it does. There is no such thing as your money, until you earn it. You haven't earned anything. You want more money? Be better than them.
Or join forces, and start up your own company. Then you can give away all your company assets to anyone who cares.
Assuming you have a current Windows box around, activate the Windows Update Catalog part of Windows Update. You can select which OS you want to get updates/critical patches for.
The Win98 & SE updates weigh in at ~165MB, not incl. all the foreign language versions.
WHAT?!?! Kiss my ass. 6 months is jail is NOT lax! I don't want to spend 6 hours in the custody of the state.
[queue theme music from Baretta]
Simple solution to avoid that. Don't bring your camcorder to the movie theater, with the intention of taping the movie.
There. That was easy, wasn't it?
First offense drunk drivers don't get 6 months in jail in Ohio.
How much you wanna bet first time offenders of this don't get 6 months either
Not sure what you're asking for here. The restriction exists because otherwise, the wings would bend and ultimately break. If you need to bug out fast, and need max turn rate, you jettison the external weapons and do what you need to do.
Plus, the newer aircraft need to be restricted because they can actually turn harder than the pilot can endure. A unmanned, unloaded, remote control -16 or -18 (if such a thing existed) could probably pull 12 or more G routinely. A pilot cannot do that more than once.
Meanwhile, the Empire State Building withstood a whole goddamn bomber crashing into it in the 1940s.
The Empire State building was hit by a B-25. The WTC was supposed to be able to be hit by a 707.
B-25G: ~35,000lb
Boeing 707: ~150,000lb
F-15C: ~68,000lb
The B-25 in question was an early model, and unloaded. Probably around 20,000lb. It created a hole in the building eighteen feet wide and twenty feet high. Considerably smaller than a modern airliner.
Your "whole goddamn bomber is actually a pretty small aircraft. About 1/2 an F-15..:)
Airliners can land by computer, but only at properly equipped airports.
...ok , if you dont find a way within the next minute to turn it off then we torture...
And the passengers are doing what, during this scenario? The pre-9/11 hijacking mindset is no more. Any terrorist type activity, and the hundred or so passengers will rush the perp(s).
If you need to put your 747 into an Immelmann or Split-S, just make sure you're not doing it into a mountain -- because the computer won't let you.
Fly by wire already does this. The aircraft is actually controlled by the computer. The pilot says 'turn left 10 deg'. The computer actually figures out how far to move the control surfaces, depending on alt, weight, speed, etc. It will not send the a/c into an Immelman.
Fighter aircraft are limited by the FCC in the same way. Limited to a specific turn or G rate depending on the load. An F-16 with 2 ea 2,000 lb bombs on the wing will not turn as hard as an F-16 with only missiles. No matter how hard the pilot wants it to.
me an my boyz knoe zactly whut were sayin. We don need no steenkin spleechekker!
Vid screens (TV, DVD, etc) visible from the drivers seat are supposed to be interlocked with the ignition. Car on, screen off.
A factory installation would have this. Your garage hack may well be illegal, even before this law.
Sure. The rich in India are better off than the poor in the US. Now, for a fair comparison, contrast the poorest/middle/richest in both countries.
the CD works better, because you don't have to flip it in the middle. Or, look for "Dark Side of the Rainbow" on your P2P of choice.
And yes, it rocks.
Vaporware is a 'never has been'
Abandonware is a 'had it, but sold/disposed/threw it out'.
We know he had them, the UN knows he had them, *he* knew he had them. His Kurdish and Iranian victims certainly knew he had them.
Go back a few years and ask Al Gore about Saddams WMD's. Ask Hans Blix. Ask Tom Daschle. Jaques Chirac. John Kerry. Madeline Albright. See what they say.
They were all campaigning hard to go to war, because we knew (or they told us) that Saddam had, and was building more, WMD's. Now, because Bush says the same things and actually does something about it, suddenly it's all a falsehood. An 'illegal war'.
Why weren't you yelling "vaporware" when Clinton attacked with those cruise missiles?
The real question is...what happened to all that stuff? Did he, in fact, dispose of it? Well WTF didn't he provide unambiguous proof of that? Or is it merely buried out in the desert, like they did with some frontline aircraft.
"It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
--Sen Hillary Clinton, Oct 10, 2002
"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
--President Bill Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998