And also, was free & open-source software really not available already on its own webpage?
Web servers use a server-client model that means the server has to have enough bandwidth to satisfy all the clients. Bittorrent is a peer-to-peer model which means all the clients help each other to pass around the data. This makes torrenting a good fit for distributing large datasets, like Linux distributions.
At the very least, he should get those tabloids to pay for his moving costs and for a new house.
Don't tell me you support a legal system where media can be made to pay for the consequences of revealing the truth. I don't think we want to go there, though England already leans pretty far in that direction. There's no way the tabloids involved here are going to pay voluntarily if for no other reason than that it would be an admission that they did the wrong thing.
To be clear, doxxing this guy is unconscionable conduct on the part of the media companies responsible. The more they do this, and especially where it causes damage to innocents, the more pressure there will be to limit press freedom.
As someone else posted here, if the password were "I admit I am guilty of...", then the password itself would be testimony and therefore it seems it would be protected.
No. There's a difference between use and mention of a word or sentence. Saying "My password is 'I am guilty'" is not the same as saying "I am guilty." The first is mention, the second is use. Or put another way, the quotation marks matter.
Is this legal? Almost certainly. The vast majority of the lectures are licensed under a Creative Commons license that allows attributed, non-commercial redistribution. The price for this content has been set to free and all LBRY metadata attributes it to UC Berkeley. Additionally, we believe that this content is legal under the First Amendment.
Seems to me that these guys are claiming that the First Amendment overrides the Americans with Disabilities Act in this case. Otherwise, how are they legally able to publish when UCB themselves say they can't? Did UCB's lawyers miss this angle or is there some other reason the situation is different for lbry.io?
By the way, since you apparently burned all your dictionaries during Brexit, libel is stating something damaging as factual about a person in writing. It was clear that that tweet was an insult and not real libel: i.e. "I saw/heard so and so deface(d) a war memorial."
The dictionary is the wrong book. Judges are going to go by the legal statutes which define what libel is. They only need to fall back on dictionaries if the statutes don't themselves define a term and I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that the laws of England spend pages and pages defining what libel is. I wouldn't blame the judge in this case either; the politicians wrote the laws.
the main reasons the dam was built was to provide a water supply and flood control.
Well which was it? Water supply would mean you'd keep it as full as possible. Flood control means the opposite. Given what's going on, i.e., worse flooding than if the dam hadn't been there, even if it doesn't fail, it's fairly clear that flood control was given almost zero priority in operating this dam.
Available for €14.99. Isn't it unbelievable that such a thing is available for the price of a couple of cups of coffee?
You compare the Apple Watch to €7.50 cups of coffee. For this DZ09, the comparison should be to the price of a couple of teaspoons of instant coffee granules plus maybe a little milk and sugar, i.e., about €0.10.
Programs trapping Ctrl-C as an exception are exceptionally lazy - there should be a more "front end" way to quit. Originally Ctrl-C was just to kill, not to gracefully shut-down.
In a purely TTY environment there's usually only CTRL-C and CTRL-\ to generate signals (SIGINT and SIGQUIT) that processes can catch. (CTRL-Z generates SIGSTOP which can't be caught.) What's so lazy about using one of those? Of the two, CTRL-C is clearly the most appropriate if supported by the environment. What do you mean by "front end" here? If you mean some non-TTY-based mechanism then, sorry, that's not always an option.
You do realise that JavaScript can change the document at any time. A page could leave the elements visible for a tenth of a second, long enough for the checks you list to succeed, and then hide the elements before the user even notices. How hard will that be to deal with?
No, obviously not; that's why I listed multiple reasons why autofill has to go. The big one is that people will just click-through without understanding.
The only responsible action for the browser companies to do is to kill off autofill. There's no reliable way for the browser to be sure the user can see which fields have been autofilled. Any attempt to popup and warn the user is going to be annoying, reduce the convenience of the feature, be confusing and people will just click-through 99% of the time anyway. This is why we can't have nice things.
Corning isn't giving the pricing which means 99% of you can't afford it. I suspect it will be a high-end luxury car feature or option for many years until the price comes down to sane levels. Cars are way bigger than smart phones and tablets. Already some performance cars advertise thinner glass to save weight.
Maximising your profit and minimising your expenditure *IS* being cheap. Yes, the phrase "being cheap" is a pejorative one, but that doesn't make it inaccurate in this case.
This is an attempt by the government to defy the principle of supply and demand. It will fail because people will find a way. You have people complaining that tickets are too expensive and others complaining that tickets sell out too fast. You can't fix both problems in a free market.
Burn-in is the issue for OLED displays. It's not a problem for watching movies but I wouldn't buy a current-gen OLED for a computer monitor or for video games.
Another OLED issue is that the blue pixels wear out faster than the red and green, leading to a colour shift over time.
I give very little weight to anecdotal evidence on these issues, and there's plenty around. I want to see specs from the manufacturers or, even better, from independent testers, that give brightness reduction numbers for each of red, green and blue.
This is the government realising that the internet is taking control of ideas away from big media and giving it to the people... of the whole world. Unfortunately some of the people are apparently paid by the Russian government and that's going to be hard to deal with. Big media is relatively easy for the government to control, or maybe it's the other way around. Either way, neither of them like the change in the status quo. Luckily for those in the US, you have strong constitutional protections for free speech.
The precise details of the Earth's rotation just aren't that important, except to a few hundred professional telescope operators
My guess is that there are way more navigators than astronomers who need accurate time. Navigation is essential for safety. Sure, celestial navigation is only a backup for GPS these days but I think we'd all prefer that there was a backup available. The US Navy certainly thinks so. At the equator, four seconds makes a difference of one nautical mile.
The US has been pushing for the abandonment of leap seconds for some years but has so far failed to have the standard changed.
No, they were and are her pictures. She retains the right to identify herself as the creator of the pictures. This is a valid sense of ownership. Or are you going to tell me that "Huckleberry Finn" is no longer Mark Twain's novel because it's in the public domain?
The physical safe analogy is not a good precent for strong encryption because no safe was secure against the government. If the evidence was important enough, they could find a way to open any safe to access it. (It costs less to break open a safe than it cost to make the safe.) As far as we know, correctly implemented strong encryption can be secure against any attack unless a brute-force attack is stunningly lucky. This makes governments uncomfortable.
Banks certainly have to comply with lawful orders to search safety deposit boxes. There's no great burden on them to comply; they have the key. If you want to make an analogy from this, imagine a bank invents some technology such that they themselves can't open the boxes without the customers' passwords. Now a lawful order to open a box translates into a huge burden; they can only comply by finding a way to break their own technology. Not only could this be expensive, but it would also greatly and permanently reduce the value of the technology.
Repeat after me: "a Tesla on Autopilot is NOT a self-driving car." Do not take your hands off the wheel. Be ready to hit the breaks when necessary. I'm sure it's there in the manual: read it.
It's probably time for Tesla to publicly announce that they're changing the name of this feature since it's the public (and sales staff) perception of its capabilities that is causing problems. Didn't the German government demand this change recently too?
Slashdot Mirror
what is TPB?
The Pirate Bay
And also, was free & open-source software really not available already on its own webpage?
Web servers use a server-client model that means the server has to have enough bandwidth to satisfy all the clients. Bittorrent is a peer-to-peer model which means all the clients help each other to pass around the data. This makes torrenting a good fit for distributing large datasets, like Linux distributions.
At the very least, he should get those tabloids to pay for his moving costs and for a new house.
Don't tell me you support a legal system where media can be made to pay for the consequences of revealing the truth. I don't think we want to go there, though England already leans pretty far in that direction. There's no way the tabloids involved here are going to pay voluntarily if for no other reason than that it would be an admission that they did the wrong thing.
To be clear, doxxing this guy is unconscionable conduct on the part of the media companies responsible. The more they do this, and especially where it causes damage to innocents, the more pressure there will be to limit press freedom.
As someone else posted here, if the password were "I admit I am guilty of ...", then the password itself would be testimony and therefore it seems it would be protected.
No. There's a difference between use and mention of a word or sentence. Saying "My password is 'I am guilty'" is not the same as saying "I am guilty." The first is mention, the second is use. Or put another way, the quotation marks matter.
Is this legal? Almost certainly. The vast majority of the lectures are licensed under a Creative Commons license that allows attributed, non-commercial redistribution. The price for this content has been set to free and all LBRY metadata attributes it to UC Berkeley. Additionally, we believe that this content is legal under the First Amendment.
Seems to me that these guys are claiming that the First Amendment overrides the Americans with Disabilities Act in this case. Otherwise, how are they legally able to publish when UCB themselves say they can't? Did UCB's lawyers miss this angle or is there some other reason the situation is different for lbry.io?
By the way, since you apparently burned all your dictionaries during Brexit, libel is stating something damaging as factual about a person in writing. It was clear that that tweet was an insult and not real libel: i.e. "I saw/heard so and so deface(d) a war memorial."
The dictionary is the wrong book. Judges are going to go by the legal statutes which define what libel is. They only need to fall back on dictionaries if the statutes don't themselves define a term and I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that the laws of England spend pages and pages defining what libel is. I wouldn't blame the judge in this case either; the politicians wrote the laws.
A lot of women named Jacqueline/Jacquelyn/Jacalyn go by Jackie, Jac or Jack for short.
If they went by "Jack", the name of her blog wouldn't be "A Girl Called Jack". It's like the song "A Boy Named Sue".
Is there a Microsoft-approved way of removing IE 11 from Win 10?
the main reasons the dam was built was to provide a water supply and flood control.
Well which was it? Water supply would mean you'd keep it as full as possible. Flood control means the opposite. Given what's going on, i.e., worse flooding than if the dam hadn't been there, even if it doesn't fail, it's fairly clear that flood control was given almost zero priority in operating this dam.
Available for €14.99. Isn't it unbelievable that such a thing is available for the price of a couple of cups of coffee?
You compare the Apple Watch to €7.50 cups of coffee. For this DZ09, the comparison should be to the price of a couple of teaspoons of instant coffee granules plus maybe a little milk and sugar, i.e., about €0.10.
Programs trapping Ctrl-C as an exception are exceptionally lazy - there should be a more "front end" way to quit. Originally Ctrl-C was just to kill, not to gracefully shut-down.
In a purely TTY environment there's usually only CTRL-C and CTRL-\ to generate signals (SIGINT and SIGQUIT) that processes can catch. (CTRL-Z generates SIGSTOP which can't be caught.) What's so lazy about using one of those? Of the two, CTRL-C is clearly the most appropriate if supported by the environment. What do you mean by "front end" here? If you mean some non-TTY-based mechanism then, sorry, that's not always an option.
You do realise that JavaScript can change the document at any time. A page could leave the elements visible for a tenth of a second, long enough for the checks you list to succeed, and then hide the elements before the user even notices. How hard will that be to deal with?
No, obviously not; that's why I listed multiple reasons why autofill has to go. The big one is that people will just click-through without understanding.
The only responsible action for the browser companies to do is to kill off autofill. There's no reliable way for the browser to be sure the user can see which fields have been autofilled. Any attempt to popup and warn the user is going to be annoying, reduce the convenience of the feature, be confusing and people will just click-through 99% of the time anyway. This is why we can't have nice things.
What's you operating number?
Corning isn't giving the pricing which means 99% of you can't afford it. I suspect it will be a high-end luxury car feature or option for many years until the price comes down to sane levels. Cars are way bigger than smart phones and tablets. Already some performance cars advertise thinner glass to save weight.
Maximising your profit and minimising your expenditure *IS* being cheap. Yes, the phrase "being cheap" is a pejorative one, but that doesn't make it inaccurate in this case.
This is an attempt by the government to defy the principle of supply and demand. It will fail because people will find a way. You have people complaining that tickets are too expensive and others complaining that tickets sell out too fast. You can't fix both problems in a free market.
Burn-in is the issue for OLED displays. It's not a problem for watching movies but I wouldn't buy a current-gen OLED for a computer monitor or for video games.
Another OLED issue is that the blue pixels wear out faster than the red and green, leading to a colour shift over time.
I give very little weight to anecdotal evidence on these issues, and there's plenty around. I want to see specs from the manufacturers or, even better, from independent testers, that give brightness reduction numbers for each of red, green and blue.
This is the government realising that the internet is taking control of ideas away from big media and giving it to the people ... of the whole world. Unfortunately some of the people are apparently paid by the Russian government and that's going to be hard to deal with. Big media is relatively easy for the government to control, or maybe it's the other way around. Either way, neither of them like the change in the status quo. Luckily for those in the US, you have strong constitutional protections for free speech.
You're forgetting navigation. 4 seconds to the nautical mile. Don't let UTC drift more than a second.
The precise details of the Earth's rotation just aren't that important, except to a few hundred professional telescope operators
My guess is that there are way more navigators than astronomers who need accurate time. Navigation is essential for safety. Sure, celestial navigation is only a backup for GPS these days but I think we'd all prefer that there was a backup available. The US Navy certainly thinks so. At the equator, four seconds makes a difference of one nautical mile.
The US has been pushing for the abandonment of leap seconds for some years but has so far failed to have the standard changed.
Then they were NO ONE's pictures.
No, they were and are her pictures. She retains the right to identify herself as the creator of the pictures. This is a valid sense of ownership. Or are you going to tell me that "Huckleberry Finn" is no longer Mark Twain's novel because it's in the public domain?
I was confident in my opinion. Search online for "safety deposit box search warrant" and you'll find plenty of confirmation from credible sources.
The physical safe analogy is not a good precent for strong encryption because no safe was secure against the government. If the evidence was important enough, they could find a way to open any safe to access it. (It costs less to break open a safe than it cost to make the safe.) As far as we know, correctly implemented strong encryption can be secure against any attack unless a brute-force attack is stunningly lucky. This makes governments uncomfortable.
Banks certainly have to comply with lawful orders to search safety deposit boxes. There's no great burden on them to comply; they have the key. If you want to make an analogy from this, imagine a bank invents some technology such that they themselves can't open the boxes without the customers' passwords. Now a lawful order to open a box translates into a huge burden; they can only comply by finding a way to break their own technology. Not only could this be expensive, but it would also greatly and permanently reduce the value of the technology.
Repeat after me: "a Tesla on Autopilot is NOT a self-driving car." Do not take your hands off the wheel. Be ready to hit the breaks when necessary. I'm sure it's there in the manual: read it.
It's probably time for Tesla to publicly announce that they're changing the name of this feature since it's the public (and sales staff) perception of its capabilities that is causing problems. Didn't the German government demand this change recently too?