Ars Technica is reporting that India is attempting to gather support from other large countries which have been intentionally left out of the ACTA process to actively protest it.
Please let this mean they're planning an all-out media blitz here in the US. I can see the commercials now, something between between a Tea Party "the government's gonna get you!"/"One World Government is coming!" campaign booster and a Broadview Security "THEYRE GONNA RAPE YOU AND STEAL YOUR CHILDREN!!!!!!!!!" commercial.
Seriously, plan the message carefully and you could run the same commercial on Fox News and PBS/NPR 24/7 and *everyone* would freak out and, hopefully, do something about this filthy excuse for a treaty.
Bio-fuels seem like a pretty good parallel for replanting, much more so than "bury[ing] a lot of organic material".
It's resource-intensive (you ever seen a tree farm?). It takes a good deal of time to get to the point of replacing the original (a 100 year old pine might be six or seven feet across, a ten year old might not even be a foot. "within enough time for it to be economical" seems to be a pretty loose statement..) The most environmentally friendly substitution is pretty much boutique service (I'm thinking of hunters who "preen" the forest to provide clear space for deer in comparison to local companies that do fryer oil recycling).
Also, you skip over places where deforestation due to logging has had such a severe, permanent change on the landscape that it is no longer possible to grow trees in that place. The story in the summary would be a good example. If you are not in an area (or time-period) of easy transportation, then timber could, very easily, not be a renewable resource, certainly not within an economical time. And those places and time-periods are what we are comparing to oil.
So...no, these aren't apples and oranges. They're a lot more similar than that even, which is impressive, since both of them are timber.:)
It bothers me that this comment and the comment above it (rated +4 Insightful and +4 Informative) don't show up, even in reduced form, while the Parent (rated +4 Informative) shows up when I first load the page. The way the comments are set up, it doesn't even appear as though these 2 comments exist.
In fact, when I hit the "More" replies link, 2 other comments pointing out that he was cleared of everything except showing her the article in reply to people saying he was a creeper also appear (and the replies are likewise rated +4).
I know it's random, but it just irks me when the standard comment layout presents one view and only one view while opposing replies are rated equally as well. ~sigh~
The same morals that say that bikinis aren't allowed but Playboy breasts are, that satiric pullitzer price winning cartoons are taboo but fart soundboards are an important part of our comic culture, and a few swear words is totally not allowed but sex position games are just fine.
The point is that Apple is claiming to take the moral high ground, and since the established moral high ground with smoking is that advertising is not ok (see Joe Camel, television advertising, etc.), it would seem the standard moral high ground would be to not allow that, especially given Apple's history of "looking out for the children" regarding things like suggestive language and boobies.
We're talking about Apple's so-called "morals", how they try to enforce them and stand behind them, even though a) they're bullshit and b) they can't even keep them straight themselves.
Just read the history of Richard Branson and Virgin Records. They found it was cheaper to break the law and pay the fines than sell legal records, and they made a boat-load of money doing just that.
Seriously, major props to these guys. For every angry email that's gone to an over-reacting principal/super-intendent, these guys should get a nice one.
I mean, he "deleted coursework" and they decided it wasn't "serious damage"... I feel like 9/10 times, he'd be under arrest for just having logged in.
Too bad this kid doesn't live closer to Chicago, cause I'm pretty sure in about 7 years we'd be reading an AP report about a wrecked Ferrari and the greatest parade grand marshall ever...
"the same skin color as them" - or do you mean the same color as the adults they see around them most of the time? I'm honestly just curious. Wondering if a "Clayton Bigsby" situation would actually be possible (maybe not blind, since then the babies couldn't see the pictures too choose, but the whole "surrounded by and told he's a member of a different race" thing).
So, if they start building shielded circuitry in cars, does that mean that those annoying EM pulse traps the police have been trying to deploy to shut down cars will no longer work? You know, the little things they throw out in the roadway with a couple wires sticking up that zap the underside of the car and shut it down...
Just curious, and you seem like the guy to ask, has anyone done full center immersion? With the proliferation of shipping container rack systems, would it be possible to seal the entire container into one giant unit with a manhole on the top, then drop in a diver with either tanks or a line and let them do maintenance without worries of spillage? You'd be able to keep the same density as is currently used, since you'd be able to use the normal maintenance space as space for convection currents and the normal A/C units as heat exchangers. If the depth specifically is an issue, you could always move the racks to floor, since a diver wouldn't require a floor to walk on...
Like I said, I'm just curious. I don't really know much about any of this.
Who is(are) the negotiator(s) for the US? I see no reason why we couldn't ask them to explain why they're asking for the things they are. Asking members of Congress is pretty much useless (technically, the president makes treaties with "advice and consent" from the Senate, though through some sort of legal wrangling he can also make them on his own), so I see no reason to waste both our and their time. Let's take our questions and concerns to the people actually involved.
This Policy governs access to Second Life and our technical platform that supports Second Life by any Third-Party Viewer or any third-party software client that logs into our servers.
I don't know about "erases all the freedoms granted under the GPL". You can do whatever you want with the code. *Whatever* you want. You just gotta follow their rules if you actually interact with *their* servers.
Also, 'you must have a published privacy policy explaining your practices regarding user data' is draconian? Really?
Right. So we crucify these guys for having lied under oath and deny their 40 year old reactor a new permit to keep running even longer past its expected life-span. Then we give money to *different* people to build a *new* reactor with the understanding that lies and cover-ups will result in Bad Things (tm) while admitting problems and fixing them are good.
Honestly, given the standard amounts of radiation that come out of a coal power plant every day, all they have to do is build a few small leaks into the spec for the new reactor and they're ahead. Every year they don't have a leak or have fewer than "expected" they can advertise as being better secure than planned, possibly even encouraging the reporting and fixing of the leaks as its no longer "we're gonna die national news" but "everything's functioning perfectly local news".
"Best of all the system could cost as little as $50. Maybe that's too expensive for use in preventing malaria in Africa but I'd buy one in a second!"
If it works as advertised (ok, ok, so we're in sci-fi land here with any product, but follow me for just a minute more), then it *would* be inexpensive enough for use in hospitals and medical centers, even purely by donation. Yes, nets work much better and are cheaper, but you could put this in the surgery room where nets would be impractical, or keep it in the triage room where people are in/out too much for nets to work particularly well. It wouldn't eradicate malaria, but I imagine it could seriously help prevent it spreading in a few specific situations that just also happen to be involving high-risk (for carrying/transmitting and catching) individuals.
"and evaluate new technologies that could make some use of nuclear waste."
I think that is the recycling/reprocessing part. It sounds like they think it will take a lot more political will, which I think is stupid. Everyone who opposes things like Yucca mountain (or whatever it's called), who opposes transporting it, who likes recycling, and who dislikes mining will *have* to support it, because it solves so many of those problems. And that takes care of most of the anti-nuclear crowd...
No, 'traditional' wasn't too generalized. Many printers (I think Costco, even) have digital photo printers. They actually shine light through a 'negative' (I'm assuming lcd screen, but I haven't gone into too much depth on them) and onto a piece of photo-reactive paper, just like with a traditional processing machine.
This gives the same quality and longevity for your prints as any 'traditional' print, since it is a chemically embedded dye in the paper and not ink just sprayed on top (ok, it's very near the top, but still deeper than inkjet ink).
Actually, his reasoning for why it wasn't working was that he had reformatted for the Mac, so when he plugged it into his windows machine, it would appear but he couldn't read it (as it was HFS). He mentioned it earlier in the article.
He also mentions MacPorts and Fink, but has trouble with them. Actually, he spends a full page on each.
While I'm not saying his conclusions are correct, I just think that people complaining about FUD disbursement should be careful not to be doing the same and to be reading the full articles, not just "looking to complain about everything, riding the thought that to get better viewership for his [posts] he has to be negative."
The equipment needed to skim an RFID chip neither has to be large nor expensive. Nokia sells cell phones capable of reading RFID chips. Texas Instruments sells kits to do the same thing.
In May, researchers at the University of Tel Aviv created a skimmer from electronics hobbyist kits costing less than $110. The equipment was small enough to fit into a briefcase or be disguised in any manner of luggage or clothes that could hide the 15-inch copper tube antenna.
...
In 2005, a researcher at Cambridge extended the range to about 160 feet while successfully accessing a contactless smart card's details.
And frankly, I don't really care if anyone can tell I'm an American. I'm Texan. I've got Texas this and Texas that all over the place, and a drawl that makes it seems like it's not even English anymore. If it took you an RFID chip to figure out where I was from, then I'm really not worried about you actually being able to figure out who to use that information.
I'm worried about what's stored on the chips. I know, by treaty, that the US Passports will eventually carry biometric data, starting with a digital picture, and expanding beyond. The thought that someone could, eventually, get my fingerprint from 160 feet away is somewhat diquieting. The thought that someone could see my name, face, and home address as I drive past in a darkened taxi is, frankly, terrifying.
See, I disagree. I think the 2nd Finder window should come to the foreground, as I'm currently using the Finder. I've used Macs (and as much as possible, only Macs) since v7 and before, and frankly, I find the current setup for that more intuitive.
Yes, there are some other things that bug me. But that's mostly personal preference. Which is what your argument, if it were particularly thought through, should be. They don't allow enough personalization. Of course, the flip-side, is when you allow too much personalization, and you never get the chance to actually get to your software cause you get lost in the pointless crap.
Slashdot Mirror
Ars Technica is reporting that India is attempting to gather support from other large countries which have been intentionally left out of the ACTA process to actively protest it.
Please let this mean they're planning an all-out media blitz here in the US. I can see the commercials now, something between between a Tea Party "the government's gonna get you!"/"One World Government is coming!" campaign booster and a Broadview Security "THEYRE GONNA RAPE YOU AND STEAL YOUR CHILDREN!!!!!!!!!" commercial.
Seriously, plan the message carefully and you could run the same commercial on Fox News and PBS/NPR 24/7 and *everyone* would freak out and, hopefully, do something about this filthy excuse for a treaty.
Bio-fuels seem like a pretty good parallel for replanting, much more so than "bury[ing] a lot of organic material".
It's resource-intensive (you ever seen a tree farm?). It takes a good deal of time to get to the point of replacing the original (a 100 year old pine might be six or seven feet across, a ten year old might not even be a foot. "within enough time for it to be economical" seems to be a pretty loose statement..) The most environmentally friendly substitution is pretty much boutique service (I'm thinking of hunters who "preen" the forest to provide clear space for deer in comparison to local companies that do fryer oil recycling).
Also, you skip over places where deforestation due to logging has had such a severe, permanent change on the landscape that it is no longer possible to grow trees in that place. The story in the summary would be a good example. If you are not in an area (or time-period) of easy transportation, then timber could, very easily, not be a renewable resource, certainly not within an economical time. And those places and time-periods are what we are comparing to oil.
So...no, these aren't apples and oranges. They're a lot more similar than that even, which is impressive, since both of them are timber. :)
It bothers me that this comment and the comment above it (rated +4 Insightful and +4 Informative) don't show up, even in reduced form, while the Parent (rated +4 Informative) shows up when I first load the page. The way the comments are set up, it doesn't even appear as though these 2 comments exist.
In fact, when I hit the "More" replies link, 2 other comments pointing out that he was cleared of everything except showing her the article in reply to people saying he was a creeper also appear (and the replies are likewise rated +4).
I know it's random, but it just irks me when the standard comment layout presents one view and only one view while opposing replies are rated equally as well. ~sigh~
The same morals that say that bikinis aren't allowed but Playboy breasts are, that satiric pullitzer price winning cartoons are taboo but fart soundboards are an important part of our comic culture, and a few swear words is totally not allowed but sex position games are just fine.
The point is that Apple is claiming to take the moral high ground, and since the established moral high ground with smoking is that advertising is not ok (see Joe Camel, television advertising, etc.), it would seem the standard moral high ground would be to not allow that, especially given Apple's history of "looking out for the children" regarding things like suggestive language and boobies.
We're talking about Apple's so-called "morals", how they try to enforce them and stand behind them, even though a) they're bullshit and b) they can't even keep them straight themselves.
"the patent examiner who works from home and is constantly streaming c-span reruns to help with their research?"
That job *exists*?!? How do I sign up?
Just read the history of Richard Branson and Virgin Records. They found it was cheaper to break the law and pay the fines than sell legal records, and they made a boat-load of money doing just that.
Seriously, major props to these guys. For every angry email that's gone to an over-reacting principal/super-intendent, these guys should get a nice one.
I mean, he "deleted coursework" and they decided it wasn't "serious damage"... I feel like 9/10 times, he'd be under arrest for just having logged in.
Too bad this kid doesn't live closer to Chicago, cause I'm pretty sure in about 7 years we'd be reading an AP report about a wrecked Ferrari and the greatest parade grand marshall ever...
"the same skin color as them" - or do you mean the same color as the adults they see around them most of the time? I'm honestly just curious. Wondering if a "Clayton Bigsby" situation would actually be possible (maybe not blind, since then the babies couldn't see the pictures too choose, but the whole "surrounded by and told he's a member of a different race" thing).
Watch this. You'll get it... Duck.
So, if they start building shielded circuitry in cars, does that mean that those annoying EM pulse traps the police have been trying to deploy to shut down cars will no longer work? You know, the little things they throw out in the roadway with a couple wires sticking up that zap the underside of the car and shut it down...
Just curious, and you seem like the guy to ask, has anyone done full center immersion? With the proliferation of shipping container rack systems, would it be possible to seal the entire container into one giant unit with a manhole on the top, then drop in a diver with either tanks or a line and let them do maintenance without worries of spillage? You'd be able to keep the same density as is currently used, since you'd be able to use the normal maintenance space as space for convection currents and the normal A/C units as heat exchangers. If the depth specifically is an issue, you could always move the racks to floor, since a diver wouldn't require a floor to walk on...
Like I said, I'm just curious. I don't really know much about any of this.
Something like the "Android controlled door opening Linux WiFi router" (via Make)
Who is(are) the negotiator(s) for the US? I see no reason why we couldn't ask them to explain why they're asking for the things they are. Asking members of Congress is pretty much useless (technically, the president makes treaties with "advice and consent" from the Senate, though through some sort of legal wrangling he can also make them on his own), so I see no reason to waste both our and their time. Let's take our questions and concerns to the people actually involved.
That's...one of the best ideas I've heard lately... *sigh*
From the policy:
This Policy governs access to Second Life and our technical platform that supports Second Life by any Third-Party Viewer or any third-party software client that logs into our servers.
I don't know about "erases all the freedoms granted under the GPL". You can do whatever you want with the code. *Whatever* you want. You just gotta follow their rules if you actually interact with *their* servers.
Also, 'you must have a published privacy policy explaining your practices regarding user data' is draconian? Really?
Right. So we crucify these guys for having lied under oath and deny their 40 year old reactor a new permit to keep running even longer past its expected life-span. Then we give money to *different* people to build a *new* reactor with the understanding that lies and cover-ups will result in Bad Things (tm) while admitting problems and fixing them are good.
Honestly, given the standard amounts of radiation that come out of a coal power plant every day, all they have to do is build a few small leaks into the spec for the new reactor and they're ahead. Every year they don't have a leak or have fewer than "expected" they can advertise as being better secure than planned, possibly even encouraging the reporting and fixing of the leaks as its no longer "we're gonna die national news" but "everything's functioning perfectly local news".
"Best of all the system could cost as little as $50. Maybe that's too expensive for use in preventing malaria in Africa but I'd buy one in a second!"
If it works as advertised (ok, ok, so we're in sci-fi land here with any product, but follow me for just a minute more), then it *would* be inexpensive enough for use in hospitals and medical centers, even purely by donation. Yes, nets work much better and are cheaper, but you could put this in the surgery room where nets would be impractical, or keep it in the triage room where people are in/out too much for nets to work particularly well. It wouldn't eradicate malaria, but I imagine it could seriously help prevent it spreading in a few specific situations that just also happen to be involving high-risk (for carrying/transmitting and catching) individuals.
/pipe-dream
How can anyone have missed it?
Maybe he was brought up on Texas public school books?
"and evaluate new technologies that could make some use of nuclear waste." I think that is the recycling/reprocessing part. It sounds like they think it will take a lot more political will, which I think is stupid. Everyone who opposes things like Yucca mountain (or whatever it's called), who opposes transporting it, who likes recycling, and who dislikes mining will *have* to support it, because it solves so many of those problems. And that takes care of most of the anti-nuclear crowd...
Not only do you make it hard to hate lawyers, but you have so much fun with this, you kinda make me wanna be one. You're not hiring, are you...?
This article was on digg a few days ago. I never thought it would have any sort of use, but it's the perfect answer to what you want: http://www.autoblog.com/2007/10/01/in-the-autoblog-garage-2007-rolls-royce-phantom/#comments
Of course, it's in a car that costs more than my house...several times over.
No, 'traditional' wasn't too generalized. Many printers (I think Costco, even) have digital photo printers. They actually shine light through a 'negative' (I'm assuming lcd screen, but I haven't gone into too much depth on them) and onto a piece of photo-reactive paper, just like with a traditional processing machine.
This gives the same quality and longevity for your prints as any 'traditional' print, since it is a chemically embedded dye in the paper and not ink just sprayed on top (ok, it's very near the top, but still deeper than inkjet ink).
Actually, his reasoning for why it wasn't working was that he had reformatted for the Mac, so when he plugged it into his windows machine, it would appear but he couldn't read it (as it was HFS). He mentioned it earlier in the article.
He also mentions MacPorts and Fink, but has trouble with them. Actually, he spends a full page on each.
While I'm not saying his conclusions are correct, I just think that people complaining about FUD disbursement should be careful not to be doing the same and to be reading the full articles, not just "looking to complain about everything, riding the thought that to get better viewership for his [posts] he has to be negative."
From the article:
The equipment needed to skim an RFID chip neither has to be large nor expensive. Nokia sells cell phones capable of reading RFID chips. Texas Instruments sells kits to do the same thing.
In May, researchers at the University of Tel Aviv created a skimmer from electronics hobbyist kits costing less than $110. The equipment was small enough to fit into a briefcase or be disguised in any manner of luggage or clothes that could hide the 15-inch copper tube antenna.
...
In 2005, a researcher at Cambridge extended the range to about 160 feet while successfully accessing a contactless smart card's details.
And frankly, I don't really care if anyone can tell I'm an American. I'm Texan. I've got Texas this and Texas that all over the place, and a drawl that makes it seems like it's not even English anymore. If it took you an RFID chip to figure out where I was from, then I'm really not worried about you actually being able to figure out who to use that information.
I'm worried about what's stored on the chips. I know, by treaty, that the US Passports will eventually carry biometric data, starting with a digital picture, and expanding beyond. The thought that someone could, eventually, get my fingerprint from 160 feet away is somewhat diquieting. The thought that someone could see my name, face, and home address as I drive past in a darkened taxi is, frankly, terrifying.
See, I disagree. I think the 2nd Finder window should come to the foreground, as I'm currently using the Finder. I've used Macs (and as much as possible, only Macs) since v7 and before, and frankly, I find the current setup for that more intuitive.
Yes, there are some other things that bug me. But that's mostly personal preference. Which is what your argument, if it were particularly thought through, should be. They don't allow enough personalization. Of course, the flip-side, is when you allow too much personalization, and you never get the chance to actually get to your software cause you get lost in the pointless crap.
I definitely *don't* pine for the old days.