Don't forget Venus's atmosphere is toxic acids including sulfuric and nitric acids. The windows in the lander sent to Venus were manufactured diamond. Still, it is inevitable that any lander there would quickly be eaten by the acids in the atmosphere. The fact that Ulysses survived 17 years in space with high radiation, at almost absolute zero and probably many micro-meteorite collisions is to be congratulated. How many 17 year old cars do you see that have never seen the inside of a repair shop? How many 17 year old electromechanical machines of any complex design have you ever known to not have needed repair of some kind? This is a machine with an onboard computer, communications, cameras, motors, engines, etc. So some parts are finally starting to fail, and they happen to be critical components.
First IAAP (just not a PhD Physicist, so if that is your definition of a real Physicist, well then I guess I don't qualify).
Secondly, it is not necessarily true to say Space doesn't curve. We are three-dimensional beings and thus cannot perceive anything in the fourth dimension. That is not to say that space-time is a physical dimension. It is a handy mathematical model which may or may not have an actual physical representation. The simple fact is, that if there is a fourth physical dimension to space, and there are many who believe there may be, and it doesn't violate any laws, so it is possible. Thus it is possible that Space is truly curved and we in like manner to Flatlanders cannot directly perceive higher dimensions. So the answer, as in many advanced Physics problems is that we really just don't know whether Space is curved or not, although you'll get all kinds of science speak that makes you think we do know.
Lastly, it is common to refer to space as curved when dealing with many problems, and there are real reasons to consider the possiblility that space is truly curved, due to the properties of space around massively heavy objects, such as blackholes and our own Sun, which is massive enough to "bend" light. Or perhaps space-time is curved by the mass of the Sun.
Alternatively, a true geek hacker solution could be done, by making your own add-in board. The board, could consist of a battery or capacitors that charge up and when the computer is powered down in any manner, the circuitry on the board fills DRAM with a random sequence of bits. This solves the problem unless the computer is opened up and the board removed while the PC is still powered up. A solution to this would be to add a prom chip to the add-in, that gets loaded into memory at boot and does a ping back to the board. If the board gets pulled, then the resident program wipes RAM. While this would be a bad thing most all of the time, it would protect systems. Of course a much more sophisticated program could be written to selectively wipe sections of RAM. It's a safe assumption that if the RAM Eraser is removed then anything in memory is going to be lost anyway, so there's really no need for anything more sophisticated, but a more sophisticated would be nicer to anyone who has to administer the computer. Also, there may not be enough time for my brute force technique, so a targeted erase program might actually be worthwhile writing. This of course, won't stop someone from just yanking the memory out of a running system. So, really you can't protect the RAM as long at the computer can be opened by any means. Wiring explosives in the system (as some have stated) won't work either, because the case could be cut in such a way so as not to trip the explosive charges and the RAM removed.
what makes you think a church can't sue? While certainly a religion can't sue, because a religion has no corporeal body, a church which practices a religion does have a corporeal existence and can sue. Why EBay has given CoS the ability to cancel any auction, is beyond me, but EBay's always been strange, and keeps getting stranger, but maybe EBay got... <voice class:Brando>
an offer they couldn't refuse </voice>.
That with enough of these robots, an internet connection a central repository of dreams, and a learning protocol, that true dream mimicking could be accomplished? I won't call this dream interpretation, that would require an Expert AI system programmed with cognitive science and or Freudian principles (depending on you psychological bent). It could be the ultimate online game.
You're forgetting one small detail called terminal velocity.
No way a bottle rocket is going to accelerate to 25,000 MPH on re-entry.
First, it may enter Earth's atmosphere from the vacuum of space at 25,000 MPH if launched from space. But the drag of the atmosphere will quickly slow it down, releasing thermal energy in the process, and thus as you say melting it. Considering the shape and weight of a pop bottle, I don't see how it could possibly ever attain your fantastic speed, even meteorites don't surpass a few Mach on entry, which would give a not too dissimilar cross-section as a bottle rocket if it re-entered base first (assuming the flat outer base was removed. You see as the atmosphere became denser the drag force on the bottle-rocket will increase, thus counteracting accelerating force of gravity. The return velocity can be calculated by knowing the the mass of the object, the coefficient of drag, the cross-sectional area, and the density of air. If you shoot a bullet into the air at 19,999 MPH it will still fall back to Earth at the same speed as a bullet shot at 10,000 MPH, or even 5,000 MPH or 1000 MPH. A person shot out of a cannon at 5000 MPH will fall back to Earth at about 120 MPH, A person shot out of a cannon at 19,999 MPH will also fall back to Earth at about 120 MPH (the only object I know the terminal velocity of off the top of my head).
None of this holds true for the Moon though, but it has a much lower escape velocity, so 500 MPH up = 500 MPH on impact.
Lastly, I must say I'm impressed at anyone that can launch a pop bottle 1/4 mile up (367 meters ~ 1/4 mi). I wouldn't be surprised to see a height of a mile as a possible target. However, Mentos ain't gonna do it. Mythbusters proved that, not enough force, just a lot of bubbles. Now if you could find a way to burst the bubbles at the exit point, you might have something.
All you ABBAusers out there might want to take note that ABBA has been "asked to join" this case, which is not the same thing as "has joined". Don't make them the bad people until they actually join. Something which I think is unlikely, they got ridiculously wealthy as a group (IIRC they pocketed over a $100 million off of their music). They've turned down ridiculously huge sums of money to regroup for just one event, although they never "officially" broke up. They're unlikely to do this. They simply have no need for any more money from their songs which still sell and they still have a huge fan group buying up ABBAnything. They're doing other things now. So please please RTFA and think before you insult. This was one of the most successful bands of all time. Yes, I'm a fan, but I haven't bought anything ABBA in many many years, so I have no axe to grind.
As far as PB being some group of heroes, well, I know I'll get flamed and modded down, but these aren't heroes. Sure maybe they're sticking it to the evil that is the recording industry, and they are unlikely to hurt the artists much, but only because the artists have been screwed by the industry. While I'm all for the idea of civil disobedience in the face of greedy warped pigs like the RIAA, and anything that hurts them and their cohorts running the music industry might be considered good. It's still stealing and enabling others to steal the work of the artists. You can call it anything you like, but the truth is unchanging and immortal, if you take something that doesn't belong to you and give it to someone else it's still stealing. Just because you have a copy of something doesn't mean you own the original thing. Of course the case could be made that the recording industry has been stealing from the artists for years. That still doesn't alter the basic truth that distributing and aiding the distribution of copyrighted works without permission is wrong morally and legally. Two wrongs still don't make a right. You who are uploading and downloading music without permission are just as wrong as the RIAA and the music industry. Although Sony is a seriously evil corporation and needs to be dismantled.
While you're right, this is old news, it doesn't mean it may not be an interesting story./. frequently posts stories over and over again. It's still an interesting field of study where a lot can still be learned and wings improved.
Recently, okay not too recently, wings were made that can bend into new shapes during flight, similar to actual bird wings. This has numerous benefits, and while you're never going to be able to scale a swallow's rolling rate for numerous reasons (e.g. human limitations, structural integrity, metal stress, shear forces, etc.), it doesn't mean we can't make improvement to existing structures and designs. After all take the engine out of any modern fighter and watch how aerodynamic that sucker is (NOT). At least the Flying Brick, err... I mean Space Shuttle, could actually glide in to a landing (although I wouldn't want to be in it if it did). You'll never do that in a B1 Bomber. You lose the engine in a B1 there's only one fix... eject and pray the G-forces don't kill you.
Of course, this research will probably only be useful for sub-sonic flight.
The thought that Hybrids are a good compromise is just flat out wrong.
1) Hybrids have two engines, so they are heavier. Hence less distance on battery, less mpg, etc. from either one of the engines in the car.
2) They have to have room for both batteries and a gas tank, thus reducing available space.
3) It would be far better to get a trailer and load it up as a battery array for road trips and use a straight electric. While attaching a battery array for road trips isn't a cure all, because when you add the battery array trailer you've added weight. Adding weight reduces range. At some point you can't add any more battery to reach further. So with electrics there is a finite distance you can travel without a recharge regardless of how much battery power you add, which can easily be 300-600 miles. A well designed electric with the proper choice of battery can easily be built with a range of 100 to 300 miles with no additional battery packs (it's already been done in fact). Adding a trailer can easily triple this number, in most all cases. So, we're now talking a range of 300-900 miles on a single charge, but now you have to recharge the system. However, if you're creative you can find solutions to this. For instance. You build/buy a quick charge system. Travel as far as you can, go to a campground with electric hook ups. Pay for a night, plug in and charge your batteries, then either camp out or hit the road again or find a hotel. This will cost you from $8 to $30 per charge which should take you about 300-900 miles if you have a good enough battery pack. Where are you going to get 1 gallon (assuming a generous 30mpg) of gas for $0.27 and soon $3?
4) Other solutions are to find someplace were you can plug into their electric for a charge, or someone that has a power generator you can hook up to or you can carry along your own power generator. Of course, by going the power generator route you're actually defeating the purpose of electrics three fold. The kind of generators we're talking about may dump more pollution than the original gas engine, you may not save anything, and you could get the same thing or better by going hybrid. No, to benefit from electric vehicles you want to plug in and charge, not use a gas engine to charge it.
2) You're only as secure as your weakest entry point. Whether that is a password, an unsecured port, an unpatched vulnerability, or that idiot down the hall that falls for every virulent email and social hack that comes his way.
Recently I changed the accessibility of my ssh port and it is amazing at how fast the servers attempting to break in learned to forgo further attempts at cracking it. Connections are now only allowed from certain ips. I know, I should have done this from the start, but I had my reasons for having it wide open.
Well, you're walking a blurry line there. Yes they have the right (and responsibility) to protect their trademark. However, They can only protect it to a certain extent. I have not seen the lawyers' letter and so cannot comment on whether they stepped over the line or not. But here's the line: 'Trademarks are infringed when there is a "likelihood of confusion" as to the source, affiliation, or sponsorship of the good or service.'
If the club puts a prominent disclaimer on the calendar and makes it known in selling the calendars that they are not: the source, affiliated with, or sponsored by Ford(t) then they can sell them.
As long as there is no "liklihood of confusion" as to the use of the trademarked item, Ford has no legal leg. Obviously, there's more to the law than that, but for this particular case that is the defining characteristic, and the hurdle that Ford and the Club need to overcome. Looking at the calendar, I have to say thought is I saw this in a store, I'd have thought it was sanctioned by Ford. So, unless they had some way to clarify that. I'd say they were infringing. But, they could easily comply with the law and publish this without Ford's approval. All they need are the prominent disclaimers.
Now, if they were selling t-shirts of the photos, I see no way they could not violate Ford's trademark. Without printing a BIG READABLE DISCLAIMER on the front or back of the tshirt. Even then it may not be enough.
DISCLAIMER:This is not legal advice. If you get sued for selling Ford(t) calendars with dprominent disclaimers and lose, I am not responsible. Well, hell, I'm not responsible at all about anything, so there. All trademarks belong to whatever evil trademark holder they belong too. Hopefully, my friends who work at Ford(t) won't see this comment. If they do I disavow all knowledge of this post.
We have a right to privacy, as the 4th Amendment says. The government exists to protect it
Wrong. That's not what the 4th amendment says. The 4th amendment puts a limit on the government's ability to invade your privacy...
You're both wrong. And both right. Because you are both approaching the Constitution from the wrong perspective. The Constitution was drawn up to create a form of government that was strong enough to protect the people of the country and ensure domestic tranquility. In that perspective, the 14th amendment was added at the demand of one faction that wanted less power for the Federal government and the other which felt it was unnecessary to state the "obvious". They all agreed that a right to privacy was a paramount and inalienable right, and didn't feel it was necessary to explicitly state it. It was obvious. The obvious often goes overlooked. Just look at all the writings the founding fathers did anonymously. The Constitution wasn't meant to list the rights given to the people. It was meant to delineate the rights given to the Federal government and to the states. The remaining rights were to remain with the people. The problem they were trying to fix was how to give enough power to a government, which they all agreed needed to be watched to prevent abuses, so that the country wasn't crippled. Look back to your history books and read about how the Articles of Confederation worked and you'll see the reason for the Constitution. The right to privacy is an inalienable right, and is protected by the virtue that the power over our privacy isn't enumerated in the states' or federal government's rights. The exclusion of a right of the people in the Constitution is proof of it's remaining in the power of the people and not the government. The government is there for the people NOT the other way around. We are the masters, they are the servants. At least that was the plan. If the founding fathers saw the current state of the government, they'd be shocked and dismayed.
High pressure washing delicate electronics devices isn't my idea of useful.
Not to mention, we're talking about a thin film substance here acting as the sealer. I'm betting, that frequent exposure to high pressure washing is likely to deteriorate any waterproofing. These things will probably need to come with labels stating "hand wash only" "No abrasive" washing.
You could probably do this yourself by getting some good epoxy, disassemble your device and apply a thin layer of epoxy at all possible water entry points. Also placing a thin rubber cover over any exposed surfaces (like the inside of the earpiece). Of course, it makes maintenance a real killer.
But burning them will release more CO2 into the air than they took in.
Oh, haha, lol, ROFL, and all that. That's a good one.
Ok, you got me here. What I meant to say is release more CO2 than they "breathed in" from the air. Since,
they are composed of complex hyrdocarbons and take in water and other elements from the soil, and thus grow, making more and more complex hydrocarbons which release CO2 when burned. More CO2 than they can breath in from the air. Hence burning them releases more CO2 into the air than they absorbed from the air. And to the commentator who says that trees breath in oxygen, get a biology book for God's sakes or take a class on biology or read a freaking encyclopedia. Sheesh.
Unfortunately, they don't tell you everything. Sure there's now a 1:25 chance of it striking Mars, but what they don't tell you is that there is 4:1 chance it'll strike somewhere on Mars' darkside. Only those lucky Saturnian Overlords will get a view of it, and we'll have to pay hefty fees for the copyrighted DRMed videos of the impact. And then only on low-def capable viewers.:'(
We should send some of our ELO defense missiles up there and shove a few more 'roids toward Mars. Hey, if we shoot enough at them maybe we can bust up the planet. Be some great fireworks then.
Oh sure, you say, well maybe one of those 'roids will get shoved the wrong way and wind up wiping out Washington state, but hey, there's no great loss there is there?
Sorry, you've got it backwards. Trees release Oxygen into the atmosphere, and breathe in CO2. But burning them will release more CO2 into the air than they took in. This is why it's sooooo important to pay attention in chemistry class.
So the only way to reduce CO2 is stop making it in energy sources, or reduce the "Surplus Population"! Reducing the Tree population by burning it, only makes the CO2 situation worse!
If you kill a tree and burn it you: 1) release the CO2 it has absorbed from the air and from the chemical reactions taking place as a result of burning the complex organic compounds that comprise wood, 2) remove a source of a CO2 cleanser.
Hence you release more CO than was in the air before the tree existed, and you wind up with more CO2 on a daily basis because it is no longer removing CO2 from the air. But this is/. and science is forbidden here.
Well, all I can say is that dreams are important, so never give up your dreams no matter how far from reality they get. Like KDE ever using less memory than XFCE. ROFL.
On the KDE front, all I can say is : "Yeaaa! It's about FREAKIN' time!" Now all I have to do is wait 5 years for it to make it's way into a debian based release.;')
Now if we can only do something about this honking huge kernel and that king of memory hogs OOo. I might be able to finally dust off my old 8088 @ 10MHz w/ 1MB RAM, and use it again. Oh those were the days...
when hardware was made to last longer than the warranty.
So do you normally carry around a filling station with you everywhere you drive?
What about jumper cables? Are they tiny little things you can lug around?
These are BIG batteries with lots of power. With progressive amounts of power come progressively bigger charging requirements.
Also, most of your carry capable charging equipment is designed for trickle charging.
If you want to charge fast you've got to have POWER.
Personally I want some of the suckers! I want 'em now! Sign me up for these babie. Yeah baby!
Sadly, I note they aren't telling us what these puppies are made of. A "new" electrolyte? So not LI+, not NIMH, not Pb, not any of the other exotics out there. It's sealed. I'll bet it's got those gel cell batteries inside.
12% of the male US population has a felony record. 7% of the US population has a felony record.
Let me put some numbers to that 12% of male population ~ 18,000,000 people. 60% of the population ~ 151,000,000 people.
Chances are high that: you know several felons, half your neighbors have records, about one out every ten people you know has a felony record, and that *you* have a record.
So what you're saying is that the word "is" is too specific to be understood by people. That would explain why Bill Clinton asked for a definition of that word. And of course the word female is so specific that no one really knows what it means. Especially nerds, geeks and hackers, who live inside their computers.
Could say the same thing to you. While his argument was wrong, he may have actually had the right conclusion, as "a matter of law". While I totally disagree with what they are doing over there in Gitmo and the other super sekret hidden prisons, they may actually have a legal leg to stand on. You mentioned it yourself but didn't connect the dots.
in time of war or public danger
This could be called a time of public danger, but I'm sure that'd be a stretch. Fact is the Bush and military are going to get what they wants, precious.
Also, it's not like these people are innocent, after all they were trying to kill our troups, but they should be called what they really are, prisoners. Not going to happen at least not until 2009, unless someone impeaches that traitor to American principles living in that white mansion in DC. Oh to dream...
Excuse me, but copyright owners DO NOT have exclusive rights to derivative works. In fact they have no rights to derivative works, outside of using extensive use of their existing works. Let me show you with examples.
If I write a book about Harry Potter going to live in New York and getting involved with you-know-who's sister and all the twists and turns that might involve, including background information occasionally, then I completely own that work. If however, I take the Sorcerer's Stone and change the title and change the stone to a fob, and keep almost all the other text the same, then this is clearly not a derivative work but an infringing work. Author's get control over their own writings, not other's writings. The Lexicon, I haven't seen so do not know if it is infringing. But if they have put together a real Lexicon, then they have made a derivative work, by definition, and are not infringing. Go and read about copyright on a copyright office's website and come back when you've learned the definitions and facts of copyright law, especially since you profess to be in law school.
They have rigged the contest, by using Pentium II
as a "modern" PC. I'd say they need to use at least
a Pentium III, and a truly modern chip like an AMD 64
would bury this machine. Still, it's impressive that
it can keep up with a Pentium II. Of course this is
really comparing apples and granite, and they've further
handicapped the challenge by running a virtual Colossus
inside the Pentium II, rather than using a modern
decryption tool. It looks like they've done everything
they could to make this Colossus look better than it is.
Remember also that it was a single purpose computer.
I could build, using OTS components something that would
bury this machine in the dust from whence it came.
However, I'll not deny there's some serious geek fun
in rebuilding this dinosaur. So what's next? Shall
we rebuild an old UNIVAC. Anyone have a spare warehouse
to build it in, with a 10,000 ton air-conditioner to cool it off?
Slashdot Mirror
Don't forget Venus's atmosphere is toxic acids including sulfuric and nitric acids. The windows in the lander sent to Venus were manufactured diamond. Still, it is inevitable that any lander there would quickly be eaten by the acids in the atmosphere. The fact that Ulysses survived 17 years in space with high radiation, at almost absolute zero and probably many micro-meteorite collisions is to be congratulated. How many 17 year old cars do you see that have never seen the inside of a repair shop? How many 17 year old electromechanical machines of any complex design have you ever known to not have needed repair of some kind? This is a machine with an onboard computer, communications, cameras, motors, engines, etc. So some parts are finally starting to fail, and they happen to be critical components.
If I could I'd mod the article as flamebait.
First IAAP (just not a PhD Physicist, so if that is your definition of a real Physicist, well then I guess I don't qualify).
Secondly, it is not necessarily true to say Space doesn't curve. We are three-dimensional beings and thus cannot perceive anything in the fourth dimension. That is not to say that space-time is a physical dimension. It is a handy mathematical model which may or may not have an actual physical representation. The simple fact is, that if there is a fourth physical dimension to space, and there are many who believe there may be, and it doesn't violate any laws, so it is possible. Thus it is possible that Space is truly curved and we in like manner to Flatlanders cannot directly perceive higher dimensions. So the answer, as in many advanced Physics problems is that we really just don't know whether Space is curved or not, although you'll get all kinds of science speak that makes you think we do know.
Lastly, it is common to refer to space as curved when dealing with many problems, and there are real reasons to consider the possiblility that space is truly curved, due to the properties of space around massively heavy objects, such as blackholes and our own Sun, which is massive enough to "bend" light. Or perhaps space-time is curved by the mass of the Sun.
Alternatively, a true geek hacker solution could be done, by making your own add-in board. The board, could consist of a battery or capacitors that charge up and when the computer is powered down in any manner, the circuitry on the board fills DRAM with a random sequence of bits. This solves the problem unless the computer is opened up and the board removed while the PC is still powered up. A solution to this would be to add a prom chip to the add-in, that gets loaded into memory at boot and does a ping back to the board. If the board gets pulled, then the resident program wipes RAM. While this would be a bad thing most all of the time, it would protect systems. Of course a much more sophisticated program could be written to selectively wipe sections of RAM. It's a safe assumption that if the RAM Eraser is removed then anything in memory is going to be lost anyway, so there's really no need for anything more sophisticated, but a more sophisticated would be nicer to anyone who has to administer the computer. Also, there may not be enough time for my brute force technique, so a targeted erase program might actually be worthwhile writing. This of course, won't stop someone from just yanking the memory out of a running system. So, really you can't protect the RAM as long at the computer can be opened by any means. Wiring explosives in the system (as some have stated) won't work either, because the case could be cut in such a way so as not to trip the explosive charges and the RAM removed.
what makes you think a church can't sue? While certainly a religion can't sue, because a religion has no corporeal body, a church which practices a religion does have a corporeal existence and can sue. Why EBay has given CoS the ability to cancel any auction, is beyond me, but EBay's always been strange, and keeps getting stranger, but maybe EBay got ...
<voice class:Brando>
an offer they couldn't refuse
</voice>.
That with enough of these robots, an internet connection a central repository of dreams, and a learning protocol, that true dream mimicking could be accomplished? I won't call this dream interpretation, that would require an Expert AI system programmed with cognitive science and or Freudian principles (depending on you psychological bent). It could be the ultimate online game.
You're forgetting one small detail called terminal velocity.
No way a bottle rocket is going to accelerate to 25,000 MPH on re-entry.
First, it may enter Earth's atmosphere from the vacuum of space at 25,000 MPH if launched from space. But the drag of the atmosphere will quickly slow it down, releasing thermal energy in the process, and thus as you say melting it. Considering the shape and weight of a pop bottle, I don't see how it could possibly ever attain your fantastic speed, even meteorites don't surpass a few Mach on entry, which would give a not too dissimilar cross-section as a bottle rocket if it re-entered base first (assuming the flat outer base was removed. You see as the atmosphere became denser the drag force on the bottle-rocket will increase, thus counteracting accelerating force of gravity. The return velocity can be calculated by knowing the the mass of the object, the coefficient of drag, the cross-sectional area, and the density of air. If you shoot a bullet into the air at 19,999 MPH it will still fall back to Earth at the same speed as a bullet shot at 10,000 MPH, or even 5,000 MPH or 1000 MPH. A person shot out of a cannon at 5000 MPH will fall back to Earth at about 120 MPH, A person shot out of a cannon at 19,999 MPH will also fall back to Earth at about 120 MPH (the only object I know the terminal velocity of off the top of my head).
None of this holds true for the Moon though, but it has a much lower escape velocity, so 500 MPH up = 500 MPH on impact.
Lastly, I must say I'm impressed at anyone that can launch a pop bottle 1/4 mile up (367 meters ~ 1/4 mi). I wouldn't be surprised to see a height of a mile as a possible target. However, Mentos ain't gonna do it. Mythbusters proved that, not enough force, just a lot of bubbles. Now if you could find a way to burst the bubbles at the exit point, you might have something.
All you ABBAusers out there might want to take note that ABBA has been "asked to join" this case, which is not the same thing as "has joined". Don't make them the bad people until they actually join. Something which I think is unlikely, they got ridiculously wealthy as a group (IIRC they pocketed over a $100 million off of their music). They've turned down ridiculously huge sums of money to regroup for just one event, although they never "officially" broke up. They're unlikely to do this. They simply have no need for any more money from their songs which still sell and they still have a huge fan group buying up ABBAnything. They're doing other things now. So please please RTFA and think before you insult. This was one of the most successful bands of all time. Yes, I'm a fan, but I haven't bought anything ABBA in many many years, so I have no axe to grind.
As far as PB being some group of heroes, well, I know I'll get flamed and modded down, but these aren't heroes. Sure maybe they're sticking it to the evil that is the recording industry, and they are unlikely to hurt the artists much, but only because the artists have been screwed by the industry. While I'm all for the idea of civil disobedience in the face of greedy warped pigs like the RIAA, and anything that hurts them and their cohorts running the music industry might be considered good. It's still stealing and enabling others to steal the work of the artists. You can call it anything you like, but the truth is unchanging and immortal, if you take something that doesn't belong to you and give it to someone else it's still stealing. Just because you have a copy of something doesn't mean you own the original thing. Of course the case could be made that the recording industry has been stealing from the artists for years. That still doesn't alter the basic truth that distributing and aiding the distribution of copyrighted works without permission is wrong morally and legally. Two wrongs still don't make a right. You who are uploading and downloading music without permission are just as wrong as the RIAA and the music industry. Although Sony is a seriously evil corporation and needs to be dismantled.
While you're right, this is old news, it doesn't mean it may not be an interesting story. /. frequently posts stories over and over again. It's still an interesting field of study where a lot can still be learned and wings improved.
... I mean Space Shuttle, could actually glide in to a landing (although I wouldn't want to be in it if it did). You'll never do that in a B1 Bomber. You lose the engine in a B1 there's only one fix ... eject and pray the G-forces don't kill you.
Recently, okay not too recently, wings were made that can bend into new shapes during flight, similar to actual bird wings. This has numerous benefits, and while you're never going to be able to scale a swallow's rolling rate for numerous reasons (e.g. human limitations, structural integrity, metal stress, shear forces, etc.), it doesn't mean we can't make improvement to existing structures and designs. After all take the engine out of any modern fighter and watch how aerodynamic that sucker is (NOT). At least the Flying Brick, err
Of course, this research will probably only be useful for sub-sonic flight.
The thought that Hybrids are a good compromise is just flat out wrong.
1) Hybrids have two engines, so they are heavier. Hence less distance on battery, less mpg, etc. from either one of the engines in the car.
2) They have to have room for both batteries and a gas tank, thus reducing available space.
3) It would be far better to get a trailer and load it up as a battery array for road trips and use a straight electric. While attaching a battery array for road trips isn't a cure all, because when you add the battery array trailer you've added weight. Adding weight reduces range. At some point you can't add any more battery to reach further. So with electrics there is a finite distance you can travel without a recharge regardless of how much battery power you add, which can easily be 300-600 miles. A well designed electric with the proper choice of battery can easily be built with a range of 100 to 300 miles with no additional battery packs (it's already been done in fact). Adding a trailer can easily triple this number, in most all cases. So, we're now talking a range of 300-900 miles on a single charge, but now you have to recharge the system. However, if you're creative you can find solutions to this. For instance. You build/buy a quick charge system. Travel as far as you can, go to a campground with electric hook ups. Pay for a night, plug in and charge your batteries, then either camp out or hit the road again or find a hotel. This will cost you from $8 to $30 per charge which should take you about 300-900 miles if you have a good enough battery pack. Where are you going to get 1 gallon (assuming a generous 30mpg) of gas for $0.27 and soon $3?
4) Other solutions are to find someplace were you can plug into their electric for a charge, or someone that has a power generator you can hook up to or you can carry along your own power generator. Of course, by going the power generator route you're actually defeating the purpose of electrics three fold. The kind of generators we're talking about may dump more pollution than the original gas engine, you may not save anything, and you could get the same thing or better by going hybrid. No, to benefit from electric vehicles you want to plug in and charge, not use a gas engine to charge it.
Not quite true.
2) You're only as secure as your weakest entry point. Whether that is a password, an unsecured port, an unpatched vulnerability, or that idiot down the hall that falls for every virulent email and social hack that comes his way.
Recently I changed the accessibility of my ssh port and it is amazing at how fast the servers attempting to break in learned to forgo further attempts at cracking it. Connections are now only allowed from certain ips. I know, I should have done this from the start, but I had my reasons for having it wide open.
Well, you're walking a blurry line there. Yes they have the right (and responsibility) to protect their trademark. However, They can only protect it to a certain extent. I have not seen the lawyers' letter and so cannot comment on whether they stepped over the line or not. But here's the line:
'Trademarks are infringed when there is a "likelihood of confusion" as to the source, affiliation, or sponsorship of the good or service.'
If the club puts a prominent disclaimer on the calendar and makes it known in selling the calendars that they are not: the source, affiliated with, or sponsored by Ford(t) then they can sell them.
As long as there is no "liklihood of confusion" as to the use of the trademarked item, Ford has no legal leg. Obviously, there's more to the law than that, but for this particular case that is the defining characteristic, and the hurdle that Ford and the Club need to overcome. Looking at the calendar, I have to say thought is I saw this in a store, I'd have thought it was sanctioned by Ford. So, unless they had some way to clarify that. I'd say they were infringing. But, they could easily comply with the law and publish this without Ford's approval. All they need are the prominent disclaimers.
Now, if they were selling t-shirts of the photos, I see no way they could not violate Ford's trademark. Without printing a BIG READABLE DISCLAIMER on the front or back of the tshirt. Even then it may not be enough.
DISCLAIMER:This is not legal advice. If you get sued for selling Ford(t) calendars with dprominent disclaimers and lose, I am not responsible. Well, hell, I'm not responsible at all about anything, so there. All trademarks belong to whatever evil trademark holder they belong too. Hopefully, my friends who work at Ford(t) won't see this comment. If they do I disavow all knowledge of this post.
You're both wrong. And both right. Because you are both approaching the Constitution from the wrong perspective. The Constitution was drawn up to create a form of government that was strong enough to protect the people of the country and ensure domestic tranquility. In that perspective, the 14th amendment was added at the demand of one faction that wanted less power for the Federal government and the other which felt it was unnecessary to state the "obvious". They all agreed that a right to privacy was a paramount and inalienable right, and didn't feel it was necessary to explicitly state it. It was obvious. The obvious often goes overlooked. Just look at all the writings the founding fathers did anonymously. The Constitution wasn't meant to list the rights given to the people. It was meant to delineate the rights given to the Federal government and to the states. The remaining rights were to remain with the people. The problem they were trying to fix was how to give enough power to a government, which they all agreed needed to be watched to prevent abuses, so that the country wasn't crippled. Look back to your history books and read about how the Articles of Confederation worked and you'll see the reason for the Constitution. The right to privacy is an inalienable right, and is protected by the virtue that the power over our privacy isn't enumerated in the states' or federal government's rights. The exclusion of a right of the people in the Constitution is proof of it's remaining in the power of the people and not the government. The government is there for the people NOT the other way around. We are the masters, they are the servants. At least that was the plan. If the founding fathers saw the current state of the government, they'd be shocked and dismayed.
High pressure washing delicate electronics devices isn't my idea of useful.
Not to mention, we're talking about a thin film substance here acting as the sealer.
I'm betting, that frequent exposure to high pressure washing is likely to deteriorate any waterproofing. These things will probably need to come with labels stating "hand wash only"
"No abrasive" washing.
You could probably do this yourself by getting some good epoxy,
disassemble your device and apply a thin layer of epoxy at all possible water entry points.
Also placing a thin rubber cover over any exposed surfaces (like the inside of the earpiece).
Of course, it makes maintenance a real killer.
Wow, any student who needs notes from 10 years ago has more serious problems than not being able to open an old Word file!
And the simple solution for all this?
Download Open Office open the file and save to a newer Office format.
Problem solved. Now how hard is that?
Nothing more to see here, please continue pissing in the M$ wind.
Unfortunately, they don't tell you everything. Sure there's now a 1:25 chance of it striking Mars, but what they don't tell you is that there is 4:1 chance it'll strike somewhere on Mars' darkside. Only those lucky Saturnian Overlords will get a view of it, and we'll have to pay hefty fees for the copyrighted DRMed videos of the impact. And then only on low-def capable viewers. :'(
We should send some of our ELO defense missiles up there and shove a few more 'roids toward Mars. Hey, if we shoot enough at them maybe we can bust up the planet. Be some great fireworks then.
Oh sure, you say, well maybe one of those 'roids will get shoved the wrong way and wind up wiping out Washington state, but hey, there's no great loss there is there?
Sorry, you've got it backwards.
/. and science is forbidden here.
Trees release Oxygen into the atmosphere, and breathe in CO2.
But burning them will release more CO2 into the air than they took in.
This is why it's sooooo important to pay attention in chemistry class.
So the only way to reduce CO2 is stop making it in
energy sources, or reduce the "Surplus Population"!
Reducing the Tree population by burning it, only makes the CO2 situation worse!
If you kill a tree and burn it you:
1) release the CO2 it has absorbed from the air and from the chemical reactions taking place as a result of burning the complex organic compounds that comprise wood,
2) remove a source of a CO2 cleanser.
Hence you release more CO than was in the air before the tree existed, and you wind up with more CO2 on a daily basis because it is no longer removing CO2 from the air. But this is
That'd be about -50 since /. actually sucks knowledge out of your brain and leaves ether in it's place.
KDE using less memory than XFCE?
;')
...
Well, all I can say is that dreams are important, so never give up your dreams no matter how far from reality they get. Like KDE ever using less memory than XFCE. ROFL.
On the KDE front, all I can say is : "Yeaaa! It's about FREAKIN' time!" Now all I have to do is wait 5 years for it to make it's way into a debian based release.
Now if we can only do something about this honking huge kernel and that king of memory hogs OOo.
I might be able to finally dust off my old 8088 @ 10MHz w/ 1MB RAM, and use it again. Oh those were the days
when hardware was made to last longer than the warranty.
So do you normally carry around a filling station with you everywhere you drive?
What about jumper cables? Are they tiny little things you can lug around?
These are BIG batteries with lots of power. With progressive amounts of power come progressively bigger charging requirements.
Also, most of your carry capable charging equipment is designed for trickle charging.
If you want to charge fast you've got to have POWER.
Personally I want some of the suckers! I want 'em now!
Sign me up for these babie. Yeah baby!
Sadly, I note they aren't telling us what these puppies are made of. A "new" electrolyte?
So not LI+, not NIMH, not Pb, not any of the other exotics out there. It's sealed. I'll bet it's got those gel cell batteries inside.
More than 60% of all Americans have a record.
12% of the male US population has a felony record.
7% of the US population has a felony record.
Let me put some numbers to that
12% of male population ~ 18,000,000 people.
60% of the population ~ 151,000,000 people.
Chances are high that:
you know several felons,
half your neighbors have records,
about one out every ten people you know has a felony record,
and that *you* have a record.
So what you're saying is that the word "is" is too specific to be understood by people. That would explain why Bill Clinton asked for a definition of that word. And of course the word female is so specific that no one really knows what it means. Especially nerds, geeks and hackers, who live inside their computers.
Could say the same thing to you.
While his argument was wrong, he may have actually had the right conclusion, as "a matter of law". While I totally disagree with what they are doing over there in Gitmo and the other super sekret hidden prisons, they may actually have a legal leg to stand on. You mentioned it yourself but didn't connect the dots.
This could be called a time of public danger, but I'm sure that'd be a stretch. Fact is the Bush and military are going to get what they wants, precious.
Also, it's not like these people are innocent, after all they were trying to kill our troups, but they should be called what they really are, prisoners. Not going to happen at least not until 2009, unless someone impeaches that traitor to American principles living in that white mansion in DC.
Oh to dream...
Excuse me, but copyright owners DO NOT have exclusive rights to derivative works.
In fact they have no rights to derivative works, outside of using extensive use
of their existing works. Let me show you with examples.
If I write a book about Harry Potter going to live in New York and getting involved
with you-know-who's sister and all the twists and turns that might involve, including
background information occasionally, then I completely own that work.
If however, I take the Sorcerer's Stone and change the title and change the stone to
a fob, and keep almost all the other text the same, then this is clearly not a derivative
work but an infringing work.
Author's get control over their own writings, not other's writings.
The Lexicon, I haven't seen so do not know if it is infringing. But if they have put together
a real Lexicon, then they have made a derivative work, by definition, and are not infringing.
Go and read about copyright on a copyright office's website and come back when you've learned
the definitions and facts of copyright law, especially since you profess to be in law school.
They have rigged the contest, by using Pentium II as a "modern" PC. I'd say they need to use at least a Pentium III, and a truly modern chip like an AMD 64 would bury this machine. Still, it's impressive that it can keep up with a Pentium II. Of course this is really comparing apples and granite, and they've further handicapped the challenge by running a virtual Colossus inside the Pentium II, rather than using a modern decryption tool. It looks like they've done everything they could to make this Colossus look better than it is. Remember also that it was a single purpose computer. I could build, using OTS components something that would bury this machine in the dust from whence it came. However, I'll not deny there's some serious geek fun in rebuilding this dinosaur. So what's next? Shall we rebuild an old UNIVAC. Anyone have a spare warehouse to build it in, with a 10,000 ton air-conditioner to cool it off?