Car batteries want to be 200 to 300 volts. This is achieved by stringing a bunch of cells together in series. If body panel or structural member is a cell, connecting in series will be difficult if not impossible.
It seems that a person who couldn't math the virtually infinite funding of the RIAA would lose even if they win, having to defend endlessly against such suits.
I'm really surprised that with all this potential wrecking of lives, no otherwise-innocent person has simply arranged for a meeting with the accusing attorneys and shot them to death.
I'm not advocating this, but I'm surprised that no one has snapped in that manner.
As C++ programmer with 10 years of experience, and about 5 years of C# experience, I can tell you that C#, Java, etc. can be very useful tools for the right type of software.
As a C++ programmer with 20 years of experience, I can tell you that
x.cpp: In function 'int main()': x.cpp:8: error: passing 'const std::string' as 'this' argument of 'std::basic_string& std::basic_string::operator=(const _CharT*) [with _CharT = char, _Traits = std::char_traits, _Alloc = std::allocator]' discards qualifiers
I think the scenario could play out that way, and it would truly suck for gaming.
But we should keep perspective. Here are some ways you can still have fun even if/when this nightmare scenario occurs:
Go for a walk / bike ride / swim.
Grab a beer / coffee / soda with a friend you haven't seen in a while
Read a good, paper book.
Learn to cook your favorite food: Thai drunken noodles, some curry dish, a kick-butt chili recipe, chocolate chip cookies, etc.
Finally learn to play whatever instrument you've always wanted to learn.
Ask a local soup kitchen if they could use your help, even just once and for just a few hours.
Visit your parents. If they're getting older, ask if they could use any help with the house, yard, etc.
Sign up for a college course or some other course that might benefit you later on. Maybe take an introductory course at a trade school for basic plumbing, electrical, welding, etc.
If you have some nagging question about politics, medicine, religion, or economics: Crystallize the question into something specific, and hunt down an answer.
If you have a S.O., take him/her out for a date.
All I'm saying is that even if we lose computer gaming from our lives, most of us can still be just as happy, as long as we get off our butts.
Right of free speech + right of association = right of groups, as corporations, to speak freely.
I'm not arguing that SCOTUS's logic is unsound. I'm arguing that even if their logic is sound, the conclusions they've reached have badly damaged the U.S., because it essentially lets rich corporations decide our laws.
And for that reason, the Constitution should perhaps be changed so that corporations cannot do this.
We need to replace the "conservatives" on the supreme court who don't understand that corporations should not have the constitutional rights of citizens.
I think we face this issue: What do we do when those who have studied a subject extensively (the USPTO members in this case) come to conclusions that seem absurd (relative to our plain reading of the Constitution, in this case). Because most of us who are supposedly bound the the Constitution don't have the time and means to study it extensively while still meeting our other responsibilities.
One the one hand, we might conclude that if we too had studied the Constitution extensively, we would reach the same conclusions as the SCOTUS. And then we can choose to either accept their judgment, or try to muster the balls to get the Constitution changed.
Or on the other hand, we might reason that regardless of the sophistication of their reasoning, it must have some (perhaps hidden) flaw, because of the conclusions they've reached. (I.e., that corporations have free-speech rights that are so sacrosanct that they can legally de facto buy legislation). I'm not exactly sure what options this leaves us, shy of revolution. Which despite the bravado we often exhibit on this site, would have tragic consequences in terms of lost or ruined lives of innocent persons.
My research are is HPC, and I sometimes have toyed with trying to work for Google. They seemed like something special.
Now that they're pursuing unjustifiable software patents, I'm forced to sadly put Google into the same mental category as Microsoft and IBM. Like the other two companies, Google does some cool stuff, but I wouldn't feel much better about working for Google than I would for IBM or Microsoft.
Slashdot Mirror
Great, even more incentive for tailgaiters...
So Verizon sold me internet service. Implicit in that is service to all internet hosts.
Has Verizon criminally defrauded me?
Thanks Bruce. Now I'm suicidally depressed...
Sign up just before beginning a deployment on a nuclear missile sub.
If they were lying, then presumably you'd be aware of it before the 3.7 billion years had passed.
If users are like drivers, then OS providers are like car manufacturers.
So let's require drivers licenses, if and only if Microsoft:
After all, dangers cars are just as serious as dangerous drivers, right?
Funny, I was thinking that it's days like his when I'm glad I have no urge to use Facebook :)
I don't thinking remaking the movie in 3D would make the plot any less confusing. (To someone who never read the books, that is.)
It's called a Phyrric victory
I'm really surprised that with all this potential wrecking of lives, no otherwise-innocent person has simply arranged for a meeting with the accusing attorneys and shot them to death.
I'm not advocating this, but I'm surprised that no one has snapped in that manner.
Consider Garfield and Peanuts. After a while, they just don't have anything new to say.
So it's some kind of fancy vibrator?
So Apple is basically saying that we should stop buying MacBooks and iPhones?
Well thanks for precluding all possible conversations on the topic, Mr. Killjoy.
As a C++ programmer with 20 years of experience, I can tell you that
x.cpp: In function 'int main()':
x.cpp:8: error: passing 'const std::string' as 'this' argument of 'std::basic_string& std::basic_string::operator=(const _CharT*) [with _CharT = char, _Traits = std::char_traits, _Alloc = std::allocator]' discards qualifiers
Sorry, I'll get back to you in a minute...
I think the scenario could play out that way, and it would truly suck for gaming.
But we should keep perspective. Here are some ways you can still have fun even if/when this nightmare scenario occurs:
All I'm saying is that even if we lose computer gaming from our lives, most of us can still be just as happy, as long as we get off our butts.
public restrooms
That joke sort of worked in this case, but does it scale?
In a week it's going to look like a snow globe in there!
I volunteer to try.
I'm not arguing that SCOTUS's logic is unsound. I'm arguing that even if their logic is sound, the conclusions they've reached have badly damaged the U.S., because it essentially lets rich corporations decide our laws.
And for that reason, the Constitution should perhaps be changed so that corporations cannot do this.
I think we face this issue: What do we do when those who have studied a subject extensively (the USPTO members in this case) come to conclusions that seem absurd (relative to our plain reading of the Constitution, in this case). Because most of us who are supposedly bound the the Constitution don't have the time and means to study it extensively while still meeting our other responsibilities.
One the one hand, we might conclude that if we too had studied the Constitution extensively, we would reach the same conclusions as the SCOTUS. And then we can choose to either accept their judgment, or try to muster the balls to get the Constitution changed.
Or on the other hand, we might reason that regardless of the sophistication of their reasoning, it must have some (perhaps hidden) flaw, because of the conclusions they've reached. (I.e., that corporations have free-speech rights that are so sacrosanct that they can legally de facto buy legislation). I'm not exactly sure what options this leaves us, shy of revolution. Which despite the bravado we often exhibit on this site, would have tragic consequences in terms of lost or ruined lives of innocent persons.
If the U.S. Constitution ensures the free speech rights of corporations, as the SCOTUS has judged, then clearly the Constitution is defective.
It's not Facebook's fault: it's not like they actually set the master password to "Chuck Norris".
The real WTF is that "Chuck Norris" works as a password into anything: Facebook, your online bank account, your sister's pants...
My research are is HPC, and I sometimes have toyed with trying to work for Google. They seemed like something special.
Now that they're pursuing unjustifiable software patents, I'm forced to sadly put Google into the same mental category as Microsoft and IBM. Like the other two companies, Google does some cool stuff, but I wouldn't feel much better about working for Google than I would for IBM or Microsoft.
Sad.