There's no such thing as a "violation of fair use". "Fair Use" isn't a right guaranteed to you. It's a principle that exonerates you, under specific circumstances, from what would otherwise be a violation of someone else's copyright.
The issue with airport security comes about because if you shut down or hibernate as per above, by following the OS procedure, and do not turn off the front panel switch (which on a laptop is actually a breaker switch so as not to draw current from the battery)...
Ahh, this is what threw me. My current laptop, and every laptop and desktop I've used since "hibernate" became available, does not work that way. I don't know if it results in zero current draw from the battery, but both the "shut down" and "hibernate" OS operations result in a complete power-off (to whatever extent possible short of yanking the battery), just as if I had pressed the power button. There is no need to press the power button again. In fact, pressing it again at that point powers it up.
The name of the startup is Strangeberry Just because of their job-titles they must be building something cool Chief Hackberry, Chief Wiseberry, Chief Smartberry
"With a name like Smuckers, it's got to be good".
Why does logic fly out the window whenever some kind of berry or other small fruit is involved?
When you turn off your VCR is it not still visibly drawing current and providing functionality? Does it not change it's state if you physically disconnect it from the power source? [etc etc etc]
Your rhetorical questions appear to be missing the point. I'm aware that a VCR's state changes when you unplug it, as does an ACPI computer. I don't think anyone is disputing that. If by "shut down your computer" you mean unplug it from the wall, then I concede to you that there is a difference between hibernate and "shut down". But if by "shut down" you mean "follow the operating system shutdown procedure and turn off the front panel power switch", then, from an electrical standpoint at least, the two states are the same. Unplugging a "shut down" computer won't affect what the computer will do when you power it up again, nor will unplugging a hibernating computer. So, as far as airport security goes (which is where this sub-thread started, IIRC), a hibernating laptop is identical to a shut down laptop.
Have you never read a vendor warning to pull the plug or turn the machine off with the power supply breaker switch before performing certain hardward tasks?
Like many folks here, I built my ACPI PC, and am completely aware of the implications of ATX motherboards and power supplies.
I imagine there must be a simple miscommunication here. I've read enough of your posts to know you're a very bright guy, so I'm sure you'll agree with the following detailed statements:
1) If you "shut down" a PC and leave it plugged in, it draws exactly as much current as a PC that is hibernating and plugged in.
2) If you "shut down" a PC and unplug it, it draws exactly as much current (0 amps) as a PC that is hibernating and unplugged.
3) The only difference between a "shut down" PC and a hibernating PC (assuming the same state of "plugged in" or "unplugged"), is the configuration of the hard drive and the software that will be executed upon power-on.
The test is simple. Power up the machine. Power it down. Turn the switch to the "off" position. This last they consider critical. A machine that is put into hibernation mode from the shutdown menu or by closing the lid may still be drawing current and providing functionality.
If that's true, then a PC that is truly "Shut Down" also may still be drawing current and providing functionality.
The only difference between "Hibernate mode" and "Normal shut down" is what the software does when you power up the machine again. As far as the hardware is concerned, the computer is off, period. It almost sounds like you're talking about "sleep" or "standby" mode.
What is all this fascination with fanless cases? I always thought fans were an indication of how powerful your computer was, and therefore how cool you are. If your computer doesn't need enough fans to make it sound like a jet engine, well, then your computer just isn't doing anything worthwhile.
and that neglects the fact that electrons move slower than light.
It's not the speed of the electrons that matters. Electron drift speed within a typical electric circuit is actually pretty slow (on the order of inches per second, though I don't know what it calculates out to be for cpu-scale circuits). What matters is the rate at which changes in the electric field propagate within the wire, which, as you correctly point out, is a little slower than c.
Just because a bunch of high level people call somthing a property right, does not mean that it is...
It seems to me that the argument for a property right in "Intellectual Property" stands on firmer logical ground than some other forms of conventional "property". Take land, for instance. People all over, both individuals and nations, claim ownership of land, that is, surface area of the earth that existed long before the human race. Sure, we have contracts and other legal mechanisms for recognizing ownership of land, but if you follow the succession far back enough, you find that someone either stumbled on it and dropped his stuff there, or he stole it from someone else and kicked that someone out. Intellectual property, on the other hand, is entirely one's own creation. As such, the ownership rights traditionally afforded to tangible property seem much more strongly deserved by intellectual property.
Why call it "The Web" when 90% of the world call it "The Internet"?
Probably becouse 90% of the documentation has called it "The Internet" decades before the avrage jo ever got his hands on the word.
It seems to me that you're not using the word "it" to refer to the same antecedent each time. What 90% of the world calls "The Internet" is the World Wide Web, which hasn't exen existed for decades, so your "explanation" is clearly false.
Oh, one more thing (yes, I know I'm replying to my own post): If the present location of the buyer is the jurisdiction of tax for brick-and-mortar stores, why do they ask me at the checkout counter for my zip code and charge me a different tax based on what city I live in? Again, not arguing, just trying to reconcile your claim with what I've observed.
You misunderstood me. I wasn't debating, or making a point. I was asking a normal, non-rhetorical question. But I think you just answered my question when you said that present location of buyer is jurisdiction of tax. This is the first time I have heard this. Everything else I've heard here suggests that it's where the buyer resides that matters.
In the US, if you order something from a company which has a physical presence in your own state, you must pay state sales tax. This is true whether the purchase is made in a brick-and-mortar store, online, or via mail order catalog.
Perhaps I misunderstand what you're saying, but I don't think this is correct. If I walk into a brick and mortar store and buy something, I have to pay sales tax to the state in which the store is located, even if I don't live there. Or do I? Is there a little-known loophole that allows me to tell the clerk to hold the salees tax because I don't live here, and here's my Driver's License to prove it?
Slashdot Mirror
Ummmm... isn't that essentially what I said?
There's no such thing as a "violation of fair use". "Fair Use" isn't a right guaranteed to you. It's a principle that exonerates you, under specific circumstances, from what would otherwise be a violation of someone else's copyright.
I stand corrected. Thanks for pointing this out.
The FSF recommends that copyrights to GPL software be assigned to the FSF. You do not give up your rights to do what you want with the code
Unless "do what you want with the code" includes using it yourself in a proprietary project, or re-licensing it under some other additional license.
The issue with airport security comes about because if you shut down or hibernate as per above, by following the OS procedure, and do not turn off the front panel switch (which on a laptop is actually a breaker switch so as not to draw current from the battery)...
Ahh, this is what threw me. My current laptop, and every laptop and desktop I've used since "hibernate" became available, does not work that way. I don't know if it results in zero current draw from the battery, but both the "shut down" and "hibernate" OS operations result in a complete power-off (to whatever extent possible short of yanking the battery), just as if I had pressed the power button. There is no need to press the power button again. In fact, pressing it again at that point powers it up.
Thanks for clarifying.
The name of the startup is Strangeberry Just because of their job-titles they must be building something cool Chief Hackberry, Chief Wiseberry, Chief Smartberry
"With a name like Smuckers, it's got to be good".
Why does logic fly out the window whenever some kind of berry or other small fruit is involved?
When you turn off your VCR is it not still visibly drawing current and providing functionality? Does it not change it's state if you physically disconnect it from the power source? [etc etc etc]
Your rhetorical questions appear to be missing the point. I'm aware that a VCR's state changes when you unplug it, as does an ACPI computer. I don't think anyone is disputing that. If by "shut down your computer" you mean unplug it from the wall, then I concede to you that there is a difference between hibernate and "shut down". But if by "shut down" you mean "follow the operating system shutdown procedure and turn off the front panel power switch", then, from an electrical standpoint at least, the two states are the same. Unplugging a "shut down" computer won't affect what the computer will do when you power it up again, nor will unplugging a hibernating computer. So, as far as airport security goes (which is where this sub-thread started, IIRC), a hibernating laptop is identical to a shut down laptop.
Have you never read a vendor warning to pull the plug or turn the machine off with the power supply breaker switch before performing certain hardward tasks?
Like many folks here, I built my ACPI PC, and am completely aware of the implications of ATX motherboards and power supplies.
I imagine there must be a simple miscommunication here. I've read enough of your posts to know you're a very bright guy, so I'm sure you'll agree with the following detailed statements:
1) If you "shut down" a PC and leave it plugged in, it draws exactly as much current as a PC that is hibernating and plugged in.
2) If you "shut down" a PC and unplug it, it draws exactly as much current (0 amps) as a PC that is hibernating and unplugged.
3) The only difference between a "shut down" PC and a hibernating PC (assuming the same state of "plugged in" or "unplugged"), is the configuration of the hard drive and the software that will be executed upon power-on.
We're in agreement here, right?
The test is simple. Power up the machine. Power it down. Turn the switch to the "off" position. This last they consider critical. A machine that is put into hibernation mode from the shutdown menu or by closing the lid may still be drawing current and providing functionality.
If that's true, then a PC that is truly "Shut Down" also may still be drawing current and providing functionality.
The only difference between "Hibernate mode" and "Normal shut down" is what the software does when you power up the machine again. As far as the hardware is concerned, the computer is off, period. It almost sounds like you're talking about "sleep" or "standby" mode.
What is all this fascination with fanless cases? I always thought fans were an indication of how powerful your computer was, and therefore how cool you are. If your computer doesn't need enough fans to make it sound like a jet engine, well, then your computer just isn't doing anything worthwhile.
My computer has more fans than CleverNickName.
I'm now using a $30 shredder BEFORE I dump anything in our shred bins!
I feel your pain. My wife makes me wash dishes before putting them in the dishwasher.
and that neglects the fact that electrons move slower than light.
It's not the speed of the electrons that matters. Electron drift speed within a typical electric circuit is actually pretty slow (on the order of inches per second, though I don't know what it calculates out to be for cpu-scale circuits). What matters is the rate at which changes in the electric field propagate within the wire, which, as you correctly point out, is a little slower than c.
...you can tell that 95% of the "Score 5" posts are going to be modded "Funny".
I don't think it's a criminal but a civil offense
Do people get arrested for civil offenses? (Real question, not rhetorical.)
The usual "this" link is missing...
I had submitted the story with the "this" link, but apparently Taco moved the link to the "violation of a new state law" phrase. I have no idea why.
I've decided that I'm not filing any more patents. If I was working independently as an entrepreneur I might have a different opinion
I see. You're willing to stand up for principle, as long as it aint your buck on the line.
Just because a bunch of high level people call somthing a property right, does not mean that it is...
It seems to me that the argument for a property right in "Intellectual Property" stands on firmer logical ground than some other forms of conventional "property". Take land, for instance. People all over, both individuals and nations, claim ownership of land, that is, surface area of the earth that existed long before the human race. Sure, we have contracts and other legal mechanisms for recognizing ownership of land, but if you follow the succession far back enough, you find that someone either stumbled on it and dropped his stuff there, or he stole it from someone else and kicked that someone out. Intellectual property, on the other hand, is entirely one's own creation. As such, the ownership rights traditionally afforded to tangible property seem much more strongly deserved by intellectual property.
Pretty soon he'll probably start shooting people with glasses ("intellectuals")
Charity begins at home.
Thank you for proving my point.
Why call it "The Web" when 90% of the world call it "The Internet"?
Probably becouse 90% of the documentation has called it "The Internet" decades before the avrage jo ever got his hands on the word.
It seems to me that you're not using the word "it" to refer to the same antecedent each time. What 90% of the world calls "The Internet" is the World Wide Web, which hasn't exen existed for decades, so your "explanation" is clearly false.
Oh, one more thing (yes, I know I'm replying to my own post): If the present location of the buyer is the jurisdiction of tax for brick-and-mortar stores, why do they ask me at the checkout counter for my zip code and charge me a different tax based on what city I live in? Again, not arguing, just trying to reconcile your claim with what I've observed.
A few Enron execs will make trillions from it. That's how.
Ask him what happens to the median income.
You misunderstood me. I wasn't debating, or making a point. I was asking a normal, non-rhetorical question. But I think you just answered my question when you said that present location of buyer is jurisdiction of tax. This is the first time I have heard this. Everything else I've heard here suggests that it's where the buyer resides that matters.
Sorry for the delay in replying.
Sure it was cancelled, because it's not on anymore. It's just that Jerry was the one who cancelled it. I didn't mean to suggest otherwise.
In the US, if you order something from a company which has a physical presence in your own state, you must pay state sales tax. This is true whether the purchase is made in a brick-and-mortar store, online, or via mail order catalog.
Perhaps I misunderstand what you're saying, but I don't think this is correct. If I walk into a brick and mortar store and buy something, I have to pay sales tax to the state in which the store is located, even if I don't live there. Or do I? Is there a little-known loophole that allows me to tell the clerk to hold the salees tax because I don't live here, and here's my Driver's License to prove it?
In theory, there is no difference between Yogi Berra and Albert Einstein. In practice, however, there is.