While the Big Bad Barney has agreed not to pursue Frankel any longer, the settlement document on the EFF website does not claim that Barney will not try to harass anyone else. Apparently Barney has to pay Frankel $5,000, which is a drop in the bucket. Barney will probably accept the risk of going after other, more likely to be intimidated, sites.
I have a DSC-F717 which was affected with this problem about a month ago. Everything was fine up until then. When I went to turn the camera on, the display was all streaky and green, except the menu overlay looked just fine. I didn't actually try to download pictures I took with the LCD like that. Instead I called Circuit City, with whom we had a support contract. They sent a box, we sent them the camera, and we were sort of crossing our fingers hoping that they would decide it wasn't worth repairing, and then sending us a newer model.
Surprise, surprise, they repaired it, and sent it back, and now it works fine. They even repaired the shutter button, which was sticking a bit.
He wasn't poisoned by radiation in the UK, he was poisoned in the UK by radiation.
I'm gonna post way too much on this, but hey, this is/. where subjects wander all over the place. And by "subjects", I don't mean people who are beholden to the king of the land of Slashdot.
See, I agree that the latter sentence is better than the former, but the argument you make would also lead to the argument that "he was poisoned in the UK by radiation" could also mean that "the UK" is a body part, which is ridiculous. And so is interpreting the former sentence as his being poisoned by the general level of radiation in the UK.
There are plenty of syntactically and semantically ambiguous sentences in English -- that's why it isn't suited for a programming language. However, adding the conceptual level normally resolves the ambiguity. Just as we know the UK is not a body part because of our conceptual model of the human body, we also know that there is not a high enough level of radiation in the UK to kill anyone because of our conceptual model of radiation sources, geography, and history.
The canonical ambiguous sentence is "I saw a man in a park with a telescope". This is a very good ambiguous sentence because it's ambiguous even at the conceptual level -- nothing in our understanding of parks, telescopes, and men tells us whether it's more or less reasonable to see things with a telescope, or have men with telescopes. If really faced with this sentence in isolation, you would have to interpret the sentence using your own prejudices. My own prejudice is to treat the viewer as having the telescope. YMMV.
Well, that was a pointless discussion, but it *was* fun.
I have not heard what he said in Russian so it is also quite likely that some nuances have been lost in translation (like a "yet" at the end of the sentence).
Actually, I believe he paused after his statement, and then said, "NYET!!!"
This Is Why Programmers Get The Big Bucks. The whole reason you gave them Aeron chairs, unlimited M&Ms, free catered lunches, and the kickass computers with the 30" LCDs...
Leakage from an alternate universe far from our own?
...is so they can deal with new bugs Microsoft introduced in their code by messing up a DLL that used to work.
Even with all this, a lot of the races Democrats won were squeakers.
I'm not sure what mice have to do with it...
But seriously.... the entire House was up for grabs, and the Dems won only a little more than 50% of the seats. That doesn't say to me that the US is sending a clear message to the GOP.
What the fuck is wrong with people who will go out and vote more power to Bush and his fucking fascist government this Tuesday?
Well, it's understandable. Stupid, but understandable. Lots of people get into lots of conflict with their neighbors -- by which I mean, literally, the people who live in the house next door -- because either they or their neighbors don't like the way the other guy lives. In a perfect world, everyone would live the way everyone else does. Because they don't, 50% of the people get it into their heads that they need to force everyone into living the way they want them to live.
Ultima?! Forget that -- I'd like to play Wizardry. The one without the roman numeral after it, you know, the first one. Mmmm, Apple II graphics fringing effects!
On the other hand, if I was the target of this kind of marketing ploy, I might feel like I had a well-connected, well-financed stalker.
Believe me, the C*O's that these ads target will love the attention.
Anyhoo, if I could be guaranteed that my records were secured, I wouldn't have much trouble with a urinal asking me if I want my doctor to know I have high sodium. More strongly, I wouldn't care what a system knew about me, or what correlates it infers, as long as (a) those records are secure, and (b) those inferences are not mandatory actions to me.
Slashdot Mirror
--Rob
20 years into the future...
Kid: You have to use your hands?!
Other Kid: That's for babies!
--Rob
Fairly large? My infusion set has a catheter that's a quarter inch?
--Rob
Tom Gardner, is that you? :)
Fool on,
--Rob
Surprise, surprise, they repaired it, and sent it back, and now it works fine. They even repaired the shutter button, which was sticking a bit.
--Rob
I'm gonna post way too much on this, but hey, this is /. where subjects wander all over the place. And by "subjects", I don't mean people who are beholden to the king of the land of Slashdot.
See, I agree that the latter sentence is better than the former, but the argument you make would also lead to the argument that "he was poisoned in the UK by radiation" could also mean that "the UK" is a body part, which is ridiculous. And so is interpreting the former sentence as his being poisoned by the general level of radiation in the UK.
There are plenty of syntactically and semantically ambiguous sentences in English -- that's why it isn't suited for a programming language. However, adding the conceptual level normally resolves the ambiguity. Just as we know the UK is not a body part because of our conceptual model of the human body, we also know that there is not a high enough level of radiation in the UK to kill anyone because of our conceptual model of radiation sources, geography, and history.
The canonical ambiguous sentence is "I saw a man in a park with a telescope". This is a very good ambiguous sentence because it's ambiguous even at the conceptual level -- nothing in our understanding of parks, telescopes, and men tells us whether it's more or less reasonable to see things with a telescope, or have men with telescopes. If really faced with this sentence in isolation, you would have to interpret the sentence using your own prejudices. My own prejudice is to treat the viewer as having the telescope. YMMV.
Well, that was a pointless discussion, but it *was* fun.
--Rob
Actually, I believe he paused after his statement, and then said, "NYET!!!"
--Rob
I do. (Adjusts glasses)
--Rob
Leakage from an alternate universe far from our own?
Okay, it's a universe very close to our own.
--Rob
WARNING: This memo may have been written by nuts.
--Rob
Must...stab...eyes out...
--Rob
The 8-track: Ka-thunk.....ka-thunk.....ka-thunk!
The Apple II: Beep! Chukkachukkachukkachukkachuk...scrape...scrape.
Pong: Pip. Pip. Pip. Pip.
The record player: Because I-I-I-I l-o-o-o-ove you-u-u-u-u! Kssssh, kk, Kssssh, kk, Kssssh, kk...
--Rob
"Well," replied the computer, "I'd haversine right on the dotted line, just look at those luscious legs!"
"Why, thank you, Computer!" simpered Friday, "I knew wearing high heels on a spaceship was a great idea!"
And that's Heinlein and Spider, right there :(
--Rob
But seriously.... the entire House was up for grabs, and the Dems won only a little more than 50% of the seats. That doesn't say to me that the US is sending a clear message to the GOP.
--Rob
Wellll there's yer problem!
--Rob
Well, it's understandable. Stupid, but understandable. Lots of people get into lots of conflict with their neighbors -- by which I mean, literally, the people who live in the house next door -- because either they or their neighbors don't like the way the other guy lives. In a perfect world, everyone would live the way everyone else does. Because they don't, 50% of the people get it into their heads that they need to force everyone into living the way they want them to live.
Hence, reduction of freedom.
I expect yet another 50-50 vote split.
--Rob
--Rob
--Rob
--Bruno, van "Funkyzeit mit Bruno"
--Rob
--Rob
I didn't see the need to give all those AOLers the Intarweb, but they went ahead and did it anyway :/
--Rob
1980 called, and they want their postal system back.
--Rob
Believe me, the C*O's that these ads target will love the attention.
Anyhoo, if I could be guaranteed that my records were secured, I wouldn't have much trouble with a urinal asking me if I want my doctor to know I have high sodium. More strongly, I wouldn't care what a system knew about me, or what correlates it infers, as long as (a) those records are secure, and (b) those inferences are not mandatory actions to me.
--Rob
--Rob