True, but it's still better than nothing. It's not like you couldn't just steal the suitcase anyway and cut the lock off after you get home. (Or heck, just cut the zipper!)
We're not talking about buying one for your own use. You don't go out and buy a 737 because you want to go somewhere. We're talking about air taxi companies forming that would theoretically offer an affordable transportation mechanism.
That said, I disagree that VLJs are going to be able to make much headway in this area. It's not the vehicles that will make it expensive, it's the driver. Your typical taxi is in the same general class as most cars, but that doesn't stop a 5 minute ride being 10 bucks when hopping on a bus would take you there for $1.50.
You can buy special locks that are both keyed and have a combination. You use the combination, the TSA has the keys. There's a logo on the lock to alert the TSA agents that the lock is special and they don't have to pull out the bolt cutters.
Eh, it's catching up though. Wireless-n is going to be 540 Mbps, which is only half the speed of gig-e but still five times that of 100 base-t. My impression is that most consumer cable modem routers don't support the speeds of gig-e anyway. And you can get a few wireless routers and NICs that support the current 802.11n draft standard now.
Flamebait? Maybe, but theparentisright. (Especially the second to last one is egregiously bad, and Apple easily should have had to pay court costs to Something Awful.)
For the same reason that security researchers do any of their destructive research; the same reason that I'm just starting to study how to build a rootkit. People need to know what risk factors are present in decisions they make with regards to hardware, software, and configuration choices, and how to protect against those risk factors. If there were no white hat hackers, the black hats would ALWAYS be a step ahead because the white hats wouldn't be able to anticipate possible other attacks.
I'm willing to bet there are more patents held by corperations who won't EVER let that patent run out cause they know there is someone out there who can easily make that product 10x better but can't cause they will sue the crap out of him/her
What are you babbling about? Companies don't get any say in when the patent expires... it expires in 17 years. (Adjust as needed for the type of patent.) How does a corporation not "EVER let that patent run out"?
I was on an internship at, uh, a large computer corporation last summer (you could probably figure it out if you do some googling of my name, but I'll keep it anonymous) where for about half the summer the A/C in our room was turned so far up that we were in long pants, long sleeve shirts, sometimes jackets, and running a space heater.
I would consider myself an environmentalist, but I am in favor of a.) reducing emissions, and b.) reducing pollution. So coal/gas and solar panels are out.
I agree. However, the improved rules are still not generally acceptable in, say, acedemic writing. And regardless of whether you could use them, saying that they are wrong (and thus that the original poster intended the period to be part of the quotation) is just brain dead.
Standard American English puts the punctuation after the punctuation even if the punctuation isn't part of the quote. I think Standard British English accepts that as an option and required it for some time. But SBE uses single quotes (again, I think; I'm not English) instead of double quotes, so I can tell that you're not following that.
Part of it is a confusion over terms. For instance, I always had the impression the "Open Source" philosophy as the practical side, which would advocate this deal, and the "Free Software" side as the idealistic side, which wouldn't partner with anyone who didn't support free software themselves.
So in that sense, this move IS at least reasonably in line with open source mentalities.
Virginia I believe has the same law, at least if I remember my Law and Order correctly. (Yeah yeah, fiction, I know, but it seems to me that there are plenty of plotlines without making up stuff like that, and that it'd be more interesting if what tehy say is true.)
Except almost no one uses 'affect' as a noun (and those that do are not likely to mess it up), so even if you always go with affect=verb, effect=noun, you'll still do a lot better than if you just randomly pick on.
(Effect as a verb is a bit more common, but I still hold to what I see above. And when used as a verb, effect is almost always followed by "change".)
Yes, it looks like I'm wrong. ASMP page (Am. Society of Media Photographers) says it's okay (with a small reservation if there's a painting or something on the building), and here is another analysis by probably a non-lawyer, but he does seem to know what he's talking about.
Again, this is just for TAKING photographs. THere are some issues if you start distributing them, selling them, etc. The copyright is one thing, model releases is another, there may be more.
I might get that dude's book at some point and go through it, 'cause I'm starting to get into photography more myself. It'd be useful to know.
In what case? In the case linked, it really sounds like the officers had no justification for arrest and that he was perfectly in his rights to photograph.
General rule of thumb is that if you're on public property, you can take the picture. You can't impede emergency crews, you can't be a peeping tom, and you can't take a picture of Area 51, but just about anything else is OK. This guide has been linked by a couple other people and goes into more detail. It doesn't address the copyrighted architecture though.
Slashdot Mirror
True, but it's still better than nothing. It's not like you couldn't just steal the suitcase anyway and cut the lock off after you get home. (Or heck, just cut the zipper!)
We're not talking about buying one for your own use. You don't go out and buy a 737 because you want to go somewhere. We're talking about air taxi companies forming that would theoretically offer an affordable transportation mechanism.
That said, I disagree that VLJs are going to be able to make much headway in this area. It's not the vehicles that will make it expensive, it's the driver. Your typical taxi is in the same general class as most cars, but that doesn't stop a 5 minute ride being 10 bucks when hopping on a bus would take you there for $1.50.
You can buy special locks that are both keyed and have a combination. You use the combination, the TSA has the keys. There's a logo on the lock to alert the TSA agents that the lock is special and they don't have to pull out the bolt cutters.
The New Homeland Security Advisory System, brought to you by Pantone*.
*Pantone is a registered trademark of Pantone, Inc.
Eh, it's catching up though. Wireless-n is going to be 540 Mbps, which is only half the speed of gig-e but still five times that of 100 base-t. My impression is that most consumer cable modem routers don't support the speeds of gig-e anyway. And you can get a few wireless routers and NICs that support the current 802.11n draft standard now.
Flamebait? Maybe, but the parent is right. (Especially the second to last one is egregiously bad, and Apple easily should have had to pay court costs to Something Awful.)
For the same reason that security researchers do any of their destructive research; the same reason that I'm just starting to study how to build a rootkit. People need to know what risk factors are present in decisions they make with regards to hardware, software, and configuration choices, and how to protect against those risk factors. If there were no white hat hackers, the black hats would ALWAYS be a step ahead because the white hats wouldn't be able to anticipate possible other attacks.
I'm willing to bet there are more patents held by corperations who won't EVER let that patent run out cause they know there is someone out there who can easily make that product 10x better but can't cause they will sue the crap out of him/her
What are you babbling about? Companies don't get any say in when the patent expires... it expires in 17 years. (Adjust as needed for the type of patent.) How does a corporation not "EVER let that patent run out"?
I was on an internship at, uh, a large computer corporation last summer (you could probably figure it out if you do some googling of my name, but I'll keep it anonymous) where for about half the summer the A/C in our room was turned so far up that we were in long pants, long sleeve shirts, sometimes jackets, and running a space heater.
I would consider myself an environmentalist, but I am in favor of a.) reducing emissions, and b.) reducing pollution. So coal/gas and solar panels are out.
Solar is out? Can you explain that one?
I agree. However, the improved rules are still not generally acceptable in, say, acedemic writing. And regardless of whether you could use them, saying that they are wrong (and thus that the original poster intended the period to be part of the quotation) is just brain dead.
Standard American English puts the punctuation after the punctuation even if the punctuation isn't part of the quote. I think Standard British English accepts that as an option and required it for some time. But SBE uses single quotes (again, I think; I'm not English) instead of double quotes, so I can tell that you're not following that.
Ah, good catch... I didn't go back and reread the original post before replying that he was right.
Why is this a troll? Mod it up! He's right!
Part of it is a confusion over terms. For instance, I always had the impression the "Open Source" philosophy as the practical side, which would advocate this deal, and the "Free Software" side as the idealistic side, which wouldn't partner with anyone who didn't support free software themselves.
So in that sense, this move IS at least reasonably in line with open source mentalities.
I mean how often is a war refered to as a crisis?
Or "turmoil". Saw that on Fox News yesterday.
I've seen a lawer cite it in a brief he filed in defense of client. (NSFW language, but an absolutely hilarious piece of work.)
Virginia I believe has the same law, at least if I remember my Law and Order correctly. (Yeah yeah, fiction, I know, but it seems to me that there are plenty of plotlines without making up stuff like that, and that it'd be more interesting if what tehy say is true.)
D'oh...
/I see above/I say above.
s/pick on/pick one and
I guess I'm a bit more tired than I thought...
Except almost no one uses 'affect' as a noun (and those that do are not likely to mess it up), so even if you always go with affect=verb, effect=noun, you'll still do a lot better than if you just randomly pick on.
(Effect as a verb is a bit more common, but I still hold to what I see above. And when used as a verb, effect is almost always followed by "change".)
a lot of times I loose my thoughts
Good thing you don't lose them before you have a chance to loose them.
Which is very relevant because we're talking about home computers.
Yes, it looks like I'm wrong. ASMP page (Am. Society of Media Photographers) says it's okay (with a small reservation if there's a painting or something on the building), and here is another analysis by probably a non-lawyer, but he does seem to know what he's talking about.
Oh, I forgot to finish my post.
Again, this is just for TAKING photographs. THere are some issues if you start distributing them, selling them, etc. The copyright is one thing, model releases is another, there may be more.
I might get that dude's book at some point and go through it, 'cause I'm starting to get into photography more myself. It'd be useful to know.
In what case? In the case linked, it really sounds like the officers had no justification for arrest and that he was perfectly in his rights to photograph.
General rule of thumb is that if you're on public property, you can take the picture. You can't impede emergency crews, you can't be a peeping tom, and you can't take a picture of Area 51, but just about anything else is OK. This guide has been linked by a couple other people and goes into more detail. It doesn't address the copyrighted architecture though.