U.S. readers are looking at this vehicle and technology as woefully inadequate for their road conditions when there are compressed air vehicles that are superior to this one. The first models are to be released in the US in 2010.
This is still a U.S. forum and the U.S. population is still the primary automobile market.
A company called MDI already has compressed air cars on the streets of Mexico city. Here is a youtube video with some interviews with them. They actually make several cars and can get over 60mph and 200mph per fillup. Fillup takes 3 minutes with pre-compressed air or 4 hours off a home compressor.
Note, disregard the commentators crackpot statement about perpetual motion at the end. The company isn't making that claim.
You also have pollution where the electricity is produced but that is true of all the alternatives being suggested today. It is far more efficient and economical to produce clean energy on a large scale at a power plant than it is at the vehicle level.
For that matter, with current scrubber technology even coal power is actually pretty clean. It's not renewable and isn't a solution but in the meantime its cleaner than burning gas on a car by car basis. It's certainly cleaner than creation and disposal rechargeable batteries.
I was referring to the text of the constitution, not to the incorrect interpretation of it. The constitution doesn't protect those things, it has been misinterpreted to include them.
I'm not saying they shouldn't be protected and if you are going to err it should be on the side of protection not the other way around. But the first amendment as written does NOT actually cover dancing, the court has chosen to pretend it does.
The answer is to further amend the constitution to protect other forms of expression and privacy. Not to twist what is there and pretend it covers everything that should be.
'It doesn't make it true, and it certainly doesn't make you any better than your polar opposite kool-aid drinkers.'
Perhaps you missed the part about independent. Almost all R and D issues are intended to keep your attention away from important issues in the first place. But just the same, D biased sources tend to present a logical argument for their views and R biased sources tend to present rhetoric. That isn't to say that there aren't reasoned arguments to support many R stances as well (as long as you exclude those related to moral and/or religious issues) the R's simply choose to use rhetoric rather than solid reason to support them.
I suspect this is an intentional and conscious choice because solid and logical reasoning is above the educational and intellectual level of Joe the plumber.
It's all just observation. Again, the entire two party system is designed to make you focus on two equally bad choices. I think you'll discover that the corruption and abuse of power that both sides want you to ignore is a completely bi-partisan affair. Neither side lifts the power abuses imposed by the previous politicians, they simply enact laws that abuse you where their own philosophy allows. Repubs don't lift gun bans imposed by Dems, they only impose abuses of police power and remove your right to free speech. The reverse is equally true.
Because she's 'asking for it' by showing it and she's showing it to everyone. She's asking for it by intentionally triggering primal animal urges in males that can and do supersede reasoning centers of the brain.
If Fox is pushing this then I am highly skeptical of the motives. Someone who wants the lose to be hard and permanent has just as much reason to push the case to the SCOTUS as someone who wants to win.
'If I as a parent do not want my children exposed to that kind of language and they are then they have been harmed. You see thats why I am the parent so that I can direct my child in the way that I see fit. And to me that would be harmful.'
Where you go off course is assuming that others have an obligation in facilitating your control of your children.
If you find content inappropriate it is your personal responsibility to censor your children if you wish (not that the bible supports the idea that censoring children's exposure is good). Nobody else has an obligation to help and that includes restricting their own behavior and speech.
'Assume you interpret the First Amendment strictly. Does "speech" incorporate only verbal communication of sounds recognized as language, or does it also mean non-verbal expression?'
Obviously speech consists of expression by language. Are there forms of expression that should be protected beyond this? Yes, are they? No. As you yourself said, the constitution is not perfect.
However, none of that changes what the parent said in reference to this case about verbal speech. There is nothing ambiguous about the first amendments absolute denial of the right to abridge speech by government.
Yes but as a true independent I can honestly say that being biased toward the D camp means being on the side of logic and reason far more often than the R camp.
That said, neither party practices what it preaches anyway and even if it did, the politicians from either party don't promise much. They try to distract you from the real issues of the balance of money and power and make you pay attention to unimportant issues like abortion.
My last significant mac experience was OS 9 but at least back then you could much more easily drive MS Winblows with the keyboard than MacOS. As far as the OS goes you can still control everything on windows with the keyboard. Individual apps may not play along though.
This reminds me of the games I used to play with the wife. She is a windows gamer and always in the computer room. So I ssh'd into my *nix system and first ejected and retracted the cdrom a few times. Then I printed a page that said something to the effect of me being the ghost of someone who had died in the apartment and that I needed to communicate with the living.
Had a nice effect, I had a big monster laser printer and there is no way you could fail to hear it warm up. Freaked her out good and proper.
'Its just like today we can't imagine someone coming out with a proprietary image format and expecting people to adopt it. '... you do realize that the most popular image formats are proprietary right?
'I do remember all that, but my point is only that despite not having a 64-bit version, it did eventually get worked out, so it seems like that single point of contention was unwarranted.'
As long as its closed source there will always be a point of contention. Because whether history repeats itself is entirely in the hands of adobe. If they fail to grace us with the next upgrade or remove core features everyone has to bend over and take it.
The discussion is about how things compare to theora. My understanding is that theora is a codec and not a container format. mkv is a container format but its primarily used to contain video encoded with one codec.
'The problem with your argument is that the output of a CueCat doesn't meet the legal standard for copyright.'
It is if the bar coded material the device is intended to read is copy protected. If his hack allows a user to copy the encoded material in a way the original encryption was intended to prevent then the DMCA would still apply.
USING the hack would probably constitute fair use in most cases but distributing it would be a clear violation.
There are also plenty of fires behind the smoke. In fact, most of the smoke you are referring to exists largely to convince the 'reasonable' people like yourself that there are no fires.
What better way to hide conspiracies than to convince the logical people that all conspiracy theorists are crackpots. Never you mind that dozens of old conspiracy theories are admitted or uncovered every day. How many crazy whispered crackpot CIA conspiracies were confirmed recently by the director when he declassified documents? Despite them, there are morons who actually believed his line that they were doing so because the CIA is on the up and up today.
I can't speak for all governments but the U.S. government has a long and sordid history of lies and abuse where citizens and rights are concerned. If the government were a witness no prosecutor would put him on the stand with his track record and yet people trust the government and its agents again and again.
The largest conspiracies aren't conspiracies at all, they are emergence behavior or rely on emergence behavior. The wealthy do not need a vast conspiracy to maintain a wealthy elite class that is above the law. Using their wealth and influence they are able to support a system that does that automatically with the aid of millions of people who unwittingly participate in the conspiracy.
'- that while millions of doctors and nurses and pharma investors and managers die of cancer every year, all would rather die in horrible pain than admit there's a cure for cancer and use it to save themselves'
There are actually a half dozen cancer 'cures' that haven't made it through FDA trials yet.
'- that some miracle pill having been invented in Russia / China / whatever-far-and-exotic-place that cures all diseases, regardless of whether they're bacterial, fungal, viral, DNA-damage or auto-immune (hint: they're massively different things), and will apparently even grow back your destroyed pancreas, because it cures auto-immune diabetes too! Only some nebulous pharma conspiracy keeps them from talking about it.'
Because of those crazy theories existing you are gullible enough to think that there isn't plenty of underhanded, illegal, and unethical practice by the pharma companies. You think they are good guys trying to make an honest buck?
A good conspiracy is perpetrated by completely unwitting co-conspirators. For instance, look to the car/oil/and fuel distribution industries. They have several layers of bullshit piled onto more bullshit. They promote gas and oil to distract you from alternative fuels, but not really, they actually push certain alternative fuels in order.
In order of preference you should be looking at hybrids, natural gas, hydrogen fuel cells, and ethanol. This conspiracy is an emergence effect. There are portions of said big money industries that stand to make boat loads of cash on any of these technologies or at least to lose less cash. As a result there is tons of money pumped into lobbying and PR.
What are they repressing and distracting you from with this emergence conspiracy? For one, compressed air technology. Vehicles that range from passenger cars to the family SUV are ALREADY IN MASS PRODUCTION that are powered by nothing but compressed air. They are about to be rolled out en mass in Mexico.
'CueCat was developed pre-DMCA, and so was your code I would assume. '
Yup but that only makes his pre-DMCA distribution of a circumvention device (his code) legal. They can't go back and prosecute him for what he did then.
That doesn't mean they can't prosecute him if he distributes that same circumvention device now.
Slashdot Mirror
"The 8088 was introduced on July 1, 1979, and was used in the original IBM PC."
The 8088 was an 8-bit processor.
SDL, OpenGL, etc
OpenGL under Linux performs better than either directx OR OpenGL under windows.
It really doesn't matter if its the same company.
U.S. readers are looking at this vehicle and technology as woefully inadequate for their road conditions when there are compressed air vehicles that are superior to this one. The first models are to be released in the US in 2010.
This is still a U.S. forum and the U.S. population is still the primary automobile market.
A company called MDI already has compressed air cars on the streets of Mexico city. Here is a youtube video with some interviews with them. They actually make several cars and can get over 60mph and 200mph per fillup. Fillup takes 3 minutes with pre-compressed air or 4 hours off a home compressor.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ztFDqcu8oJ4
Note, disregard the commentators crackpot statement about perpetual motion at the end. The company isn't making that claim.
You also have pollution where the electricity is produced but that is true of all the alternatives being suggested today. It is far more efficient and economical to produce clean energy on a large scale at a power plant than it is at the vehicle level.
For that matter, with current scrubber technology even coal power is actually pretty clean. It's not renewable and isn't a solution but in the meantime its cleaner than burning gas on a car by car basis. It's certainly cleaner than creation and disposal rechargeable batteries.
'or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble'
No paintings, no dance, no silent film (unless it includes print).
Just speech, press (which would mean the written word at the time, not merely the news media), and the right to assemble peacefully. That is it.
There is nothing there about other forms of expression or that suggests other forms would be covered.
I was referring to the text of the constitution, not to the incorrect interpretation of it. The constitution doesn't protect those things, it has been misinterpreted to include them.
I'm not saying they shouldn't be protected and if you are going to err it should be on the side of protection not the other way around. But the first amendment as written does NOT actually cover dancing, the court has chosen to pretend it does.
The answer is to further amend the constitution to protect other forms of expression and privacy. Not to twist what is there and pretend it covers everything that should be.
'It doesn't make it true, and it certainly doesn't make you any better than your polar opposite kool-aid drinkers.'
Perhaps you missed the part about independent. Almost all R and D issues are intended to keep your attention away from important issues in the first place. But just the same, D biased sources tend to present a logical argument for their views and R biased sources tend to present rhetoric. That isn't to say that there aren't reasoned arguments to support many R stances as well (as long as you exclude those related to moral and/or religious issues) the R's simply choose to use rhetoric rather than solid reason to support them.
I suspect this is an intentional and conscious choice because solid and logical reasoning is above the educational and intellectual level of Joe the plumber.
It's all just observation. Again, the entire two party system is designed to make you focus on two equally bad choices. I think you'll discover that the corruption and abuse of power that both sides want you to ignore is a completely bi-partisan affair. Neither side lifts the power abuses imposed by the previous politicians, they simply enact laws that abuse you where their own philosophy allows. Repubs don't lift gun bans imposed by Dems, they only impose abuses of police power and remove your right to free speech. The reverse is equally true.
Welcome to U.S. of A
Because she's 'asking for it' by showing it and she's showing it to everyone. She's asking for it by intentionally triggering primal animal urges in males that can and do supersede reasoning centers of the brain.
If Fox is pushing this then I am highly skeptical of the motives. Someone who wants the lose to be hard and permanent has just as much reason to push the case to the SCOTUS as someone who wants to win.
'If I as a parent do not want my children exposed to that kind of language and they are then they have been harmed. You see thats why I am the parent so that I can direct my child in the way that I see fit. And to me that would be harmful.'
Where you go off course is assuming that others have an obligation in facilitating your control of your children.
If you find content inappropriate it is your personal responsibility to censor your children if you wish (not that the bible supports the idea that censoring children's exposure is good). Nobody else has an obligation to help and that includes restricting their own behavior and speech.
'Assume you interpret the First Amendment strictly. Does "speech" incorporate only verbal communication of sounds recognized as language, or does it also mean non-verbal expression?'
Obviously speech consists of expression by language. Are there forms of expression that should be protected beyond this? Yes, are they? No. As you yourself said, the constitution is not perfect.
However, none of that changes what the parent said in reference to this case about verbal speech. There is nothing ambiguous about the first amendments absolute denial of the right to abridge speech by government.
'Many conservatives don't like Fox any more than the rest of the liberal media.'
Pray tell where is this liberal media? There is no shortage of bias on the major media outlets but its hardly biased toward liberal or conservative.
If you want to hope to see real news you have to read foreign reporting.
Yes but as a true independent I can honestly say that being biased toward the D camp means being on the side of logic and reason far more often than the R camp.
That said, neither party practices what it preaches anyway and even if it did, the politicians from either party don't promise much. They try to distract you from the real issues of the balance of money and power and make you pay attention to unimportant issues like abortion.
I prefer to use all of the above ;)
My last significant mac experience was OS 9 but at least back then you could much more easily drive MS Winblows with the keyboard than MacOS. As far as the OS goes you can still control everything on windows with the keyboard. Individual apps may not play along though.
This reminds me of the games I used to play with the wife. She is a windows gamer and always in the computer room. So I ssh'd into my *nix system and first ejected and retracted the cdrom a few times. Then I printed a page that said something to the effect of me being the ghost of someone who had died in the apartment and that I needed to communicate with the living.
Had a nice effect, I had a big monster laser printer and there is no way you could fail to hear it warm up. Freaked her out good and proper.
HTML5? I haven't been watching for awhile but last I'd heard HTMLx.xx was ended and superceded by the xhtmlx.xx standards. What happened?
'Its just like today we can't imagine someone coming out with a proprietary image format and expecting people to adopt it. ' ... you do realize that the most popular image formats are proprietary right?
you need a 64 bit system with more than 3 gig of ram just to boot the current version of windows.
'I do remember all that, but my point is only that despite not having a 64-bit version, it did eventually get worked out, so it seems like that single point of contention was unwarranted.'
As long as its closed source there will always be a point of contention. Because whether history repeats itself is entirely in the hands of adobe. If they fail to grace us with the next upgrade or remove core features everyone has to bend over and take it.
The discussion is about how things compare to theora. My understanding is that theora is a codec and not a container format. mkv is a container format but its primarily used to contain video encoded with one codec.
'The problem with your argument is that the output of a CueCat doesn't meet the legal standard for copyright.'
It is if the bar coded material the device is intended to read is copy protected. If his hack allows a user to copy the encoded material in a way the original encryption was intended to prevent then the DMCA would still apply.
USING the hack would probably constitute fair use in most cases but distributing it would be a clear violation.
P.S. IANAL but I play one on Slashdot.
There are also plenty of fires behind the smoke. In fact, most of the smoke you are referring to exists largely to convince the 'reasonable' people like yourself that there are no fires.
What better way to hide conspiracies than to convince the logical people that all conspiracy theorists are crackpots. Never you mind that dozens of old conspiracy theories are admitted or uncovered every day. How many crazy whispered crackpot CIA conspiracies were confirmed recently by the director when he declassified documents? Despite them, there are morons who actually believed his line that they were doing so because the CIA is on the up and up today.
I can't speak for all governments but the U.S. government has a long and sordid history of lies and abuse where citizens and rights are concerned. If the government were a witness no prosecutor would put him on the stand with his track record and yet people trust the government and its agents again and again.
The largest conspiracies aren't conspiracies at all, they are emergence behavior or rely on emergence behavior. The wealthy do not need a vast conspiracy to maintain a wealthy elite class that is above the law. Using their wealth and influence they are able to support a system that does that automatically with the aid of millions of people who unwittingly participate in the conspiracy.
'- that while millions of doctors and nurses and pharma investors and managers die of cancer every year, all would rather die in horrible pain than admit there's a cure for cancer and use it to save themselves'
There are actually a half dozen cancer 'cures' that haven't made it through FDA trials yet.
'- that some miracle pill having been invented in Russia / China / whatever-far-and-exotic-place that cures all diseases, regardless of whether they're bacterial, fungal, viral, DNA-damage or auto-immune (hint: they're massively different things), and will apparently even grow back your destroyed pancreas, because it cures auto-immune diabetes too! Only some nebulous pharma conspiracy keeps them from talking about it.'
Because of those crazy theories existing you are gullible enough to think that there isn't plenty of underhanded, illegal, and unethical practice by the pharma companies. You think they are good guys trying to make an honest buck?
A good conspiracy is perpetrated by completely unwitting co-conspirators. For instance, look to the car/oil/and fuel distribution industries. They have several layers of bullshit piled onto more bullshit. They promote gas and oil to distract you from alternative fuels, but not really, they actually push certain alternative fuels in order.
In order of preference you should be looking at hybrids, natural gas, hydrogen fuel cells, and ethanol. This conspiracy is an emergence effect. There are portions of said big money industries that stand to make boat loads of cash on any of these technologies or at least to lose less cash. As a result there is tons of money pumped into lobbying and PR.
What are they repressing and distracting you from with this emergence conspiracy? For one, compressed air technology. Vehicles that range from passenger cars to the family SUV are ALREADY IN MASS PRODUCTION that are powered by nothing but compressed air. They are about to be rolled out en mass in Mexico.
That's because yours is already hacked. The originals used a simple encoding scheme to encrypt the output.
'CueCat was developed pre-DMCA, and so was your code I would assume. '
Yup but that only makes his pre-DMCA distribution of a circumvention device (his code) legal. They can't go back and prosecute him for what he did then.
That doesn't mean they can't prosecute him if he distributes that same circumvention device now.