Whose hardware? The Las Vegas Review-Journal? Corporate indemnity. Just because they own another corporation (Righthaven) and told that corporation what to do (sue) doesn't mean they are in any way responsible for the fact that that corporation followed their commands and sued. Or did you mean Righthaven's servers? They don't have any, they are a shell corporation. Whenever they had a single cent they gave it to the Las Vegas Review-Journal. No office, no employees. Their only property was their right to sue on behalf of the LVRJ, and the judge said that is not a transferable right so they could not have been given it. That's why they lost, and why the next time the LVRJ makes a shell corporation so they can sue without risking counter-suit and without getting bad press, it'll work. It already did work, actually. They raked it in on settlements and lost not one cent, all while getting zero bad press about it.
No it doesn't. In this case they didn't have rights to the copyrighted material they claiming as their own. That doesn't need to be precedent, that's kind of the basics of law...it doesn't apply to the RIAA because while the RIAA doesn't hold the rights, they also have never sued anybody. (Music labels do the suing, and for some reason Slashdot editors delete all mention of music labels and replace it with RIAA).
According to Wikipedia, the coal power station industry in the USA consumes 4200 metric tonnes of coal per megawatt hour produced. Really, 42? They could not have come up with a more obviously fabricated value if they tried.
No, they didn't. They considered the possibility of a runaway nitrogen fission chain reaction, ran the numbers, and determined it would not happen. Sort of like the LHC blackhole bullshit. "We considered the possibility, the odds are trillions to one against" "So......they aren't zero? SCIENTISTS CONFIRM LHC MAY DESTROY UNIVERSE".
Cheap electricity makes electric cars and electric mass transit much more economical, so indirectly cheap power plants can theoretically lower the demand for oil. I doubt that's what they meant, though;)
The atmosphere has about 1/1000 of the mass of the outer (molten) core. Temperature is average energy per unit mass. So if you want the average global temperature up by 100 Kelvin so all the water boils off, that'll involve transferring enough energy from the outer core to lower it by, 0.1 Kelvin? (Except that obviously the crust and oceans are absorbing heat from the air...still, the oceans and surface are pretty light compared to the core, too, so you get a number more like 10 K cooler core = boiling surface. 10K being enough to freeze a bunch of the outer core, but not to the point of magnetosphere collapse) So, 2 happens well before 1. But does 2 happen? No. Geothermal heat is no different than coal heat or nuclear heat. It heats the air, but the air is in thermal equilibrium with the sun, and so being hotter means it emits more energy (blackbody radiation, yo) and cools off, balance is restored. It gets complicated because hotter air alters the vapor pressure equilibrium with surface water, so that means more clouds (higher atmospheric albedo, so less solar radiation absorbed by the surface) but it also means more water vapor in the air (as a polar molecule, water lets most sunlight through unmolested, but when the blackbody infrared from the surface/air hits it, it gets absorbed and remitted so a portion of the spaceward infrared ends up coming back to the surface, further mucking up the nice simple thermal equilibrium equations in a non-linear manner, which frankly is just plain rude). But unless we start replacing gigawatt powerplants with 1000 terrawatt geothermal stations, it's not going to alter the average air temperature. Because we're already emitting heat, and it doesn't do a damn thing to the temperature. More or less the atmosphere is in equilibrium, and adding energy directly cannot disrupt that equilibrium.
Hyperthreading! With 8 physical cores, the OS sees 16 logical cores. 16 threads can be running at once. Though technically only 8 are running because there aren't extra copies of the adders, multipliers, etc, whenever one is waiting on memory, or stalled because a branch miss-prediction emptied the pipeline, etc. then the other thread can run instantly. Normally it's stupid to context switch due to a branch error or cache miss, since probably that will be resolved before you can finish the very expensive context switch operation. Having two sets of registers and such allows for instant switching between which of the two logical cores is being handled by the physical core, so any time either thread is waiting on memory, the other thread can get some work done. And whenever it's stalled on something that actually would require a context switch normally, it can be handed off to the other one while that switch is occurring. It's not nearly as good as having 16 physical cores, but usually you get about 30% more CPU time squeezed in be doing this. 4 hours * 1.30 = 5.2 hours. Seems consistent to me.
Yes, that is what the documentation says. But Microsoft tech support says "per organization", and the people who had the problem said that when they hit the limit, the entire company was shut off, not just the one employee.
Except that the law defines a debt as an something that is owed and must be paid. When I ask for a ticket to a movie and the clerk says "$10 please" that is not a debt because I don't HAVE to pay it, I can back out of the transaction at no cost. When I buy a prepay card for my cellphone, that's not a debt because I can say "Actually, never mind!" When I get a cellphone bill for my not-prepay cell, that is a debt because I the service was rendered, I must pay it. If I rent an apartment, the damage deposit is not a debt because I can always say "Actually I live in a van down by the river". But the rent is a debt because without my legal notice (this obviously depends on state rental law) I can't just say "Not paying this month, bye". If I line up all night, get an iPhone 4S, and go to pay, that's not a debt even though I'm already holding the phone in my hand. But if I rage at being told I can't pay cash, and smash up a window, and they send me a bill, that is a debt because I can't just say "Just kidding, the window is fine!" You can play stupid word games all you want, talking about how technically you are taking a 5 second loan out, but it's bullshit. It's just like drug dealers who say "I'm just selling bags, whatever is inside is just filler"
So when Apple refuses to accept cash for an iPhone, they are breaking the law? When a movie theater refuses to accept $100 bills, they are breaking the law? When a gas station refuses to accept $45 in pennies, they are breaking the law? And when I take a chocolate bar from a store, I'm not stealing it? I'm just incurring a debt and then missing my payment deadline. So, that's a civil matter, not criminal, and I guess all lawyers defending people for shoplifting are just awful for not bringing that point up.
It shouldn't. The crux of the ruling is that the content can change, and even if it doesn't there's no evidence that you read every last word on the page. Therefore, just posting a link to a site that says something defamatory doesn't constitute republishing or endorsing that statement. However, if you have a content aggregator, it's pretty damn obvious exactly what it's linking to. Because it's not just presenting links to some all gibberish URL, it's naming that link after the copyrighted content at that tracker, complete with file size, duration, and all that stuff. You cannot make the defense that "it's just a link I didn't know what it was to!" when you list exactly what it's linking to.
No, the ruling still allows for a link to be defamatory if the intent is apparent. The reasoning behind the ruling is that if you link to a page, it can be changed by the host so it is senseless to view the link as your endorsement of all past and future content. Say, you link to a guy's blog and he makes a defamatory post after you link to it. Or, you link to it because you like what he said today, but further down on the page you linked he has defamatory posts you didn't notice.
However, ruling that having a link does not constitute endorsement of the content of the link doesn't make all links OK. If context makes your endorsement apparent, then just because it's a link does not protect you.
Encrypted search works without being signed in. It's also 4 months old. The news is they are making it default for signed in users, not that it exists.
Yes. The angular momentum of a top is the sum of the angular momentum of all of the atoms that make it up. That's their motion around an axis, plus the orbital momentum of the electrons, plus the spins of the electrons and quarks. Since (as far as I know) you can't transform subatomic spin into motion through space, it's usually completely ignored. But, spin and angular momentum are nevertheless considered to be the same thing still. They should average out to zero in any object of interest, so it doesn't really matter at all. Same thing here. The momentum of our galaxy is the rotation of the stars around the center of the galaxy, plus the rotation of the stars themselves. But the stars rotation is pretty minor compared to the total, so it's not important. Since there isn't really a "center" of the universe, then there's no term to "dominate" the rotation of the galaxies, so the "angular momentum" of the universe is the sum of that of the galaxies.
Obese mothers have obese children, even surrogate mothers! It has to do with gene activation. Being obese activates certain genes that make it easier to become obese (hence the unfortunate positive feedback effect of being overweight). This gene activation also occurs in utero. Or it does in mice, anyway. So there is certainly a potential causative link between adult obesity and infant obesity, based on mouse studies.
Yes, you read that. It was written by the submitter, not by the judge or by the lawyers. The judge said that the Federal government is not bound by State statues. And so even if in that particular state there's a law that says stolen property becomes the property of the possessor after X amount of time, these laws do not apply to Federal property. But that's not as nice of an anti-government soundbite, so obviously some words had to be excised.
It's well established in the gaming community. Publishers and developers have been screaming it non-stop at the top of their lungs for years now, and most fans agree completely. In fact they say that used games are worse than piracy. Even Penny Arcade has said that buying second hand is closer to literally stealing than it is to piracy. Their position on why used record stores aren't stealing is that "games are budgeted on the assumption of no used game sales, and books and albums aren't." As video rental chains go out of business, there are fewer and fewer deep pockets to fight against the total removal of the doctrine of first sale.
A tank engine is a type of steam locomotive. It's called that because it carries its water in a tank that's on-board, rather than in the coal car. They are pretty distinctive in appearance because of the long cylindrical tank that makes up most of the engine. Shining Time Station used them as characters because the flat end of the tank sticking out the front was perfect for drawing a face on;)
Slashdot Mirror
Whose hardware? The Las Vegas Review-Journal? Corporate indemnity. Just because they own another corporation (Righthaven) and told that corporation what to do (sue) doesn't mean they are in any way responsible for the fact that that corporation followed their commands and sued. Or did you mean Righthaven's servers? They don't have any, they are a shell corporation. Whenever they had a single cent they gave it to the Las Vegas Review-Journal. No office, no employees. Their only property was their right to sue on behalf of the LVRJ, and the judge said that is not a transferable right so they could not have been given it. That's why they lost, and why the next time the LVRJ makes a shell corporation so they can sue without risking counter-suit and without getting bad press, it'll work. It already did work, actually. They raked it in on settlements and lost not one cent, all while getting zero bad press about it.
No it doesn't. In this case they didn't have rights to the copyrighted material they claiming as their own. That doesn't need to be precedent, that's kind of the basics of law...it doesn't apply to the RIAA because while the RIAA doesn't hold the rights, they also have never sued anybody. (Music labels do the suing, and for some reason Slashdot editors delete all mention of music labels and replace it with RIAA).
According to Wikipedia, the coal power station industry in the USA consumes 4200 metric tonnes of coal per megawatt hour produced. Really, 42? They could not have come up with a more obviously fabricated value if they tried.
No, they didn't. They considered the possibility of a runaway nitrogen fission chain reaction, ran the numbers, and determined it would not happen. Sort of like the LHC blackhole bullshit. "We considered the possibility, the odds are trillions to one against" "So......they aren't zero? SCIENTISTS CONFIRM LHC MAY DESTROY UNIVERSE".
Cheap electricity makes electric cars and electric mass transit much more economical, so indirectly cheap power plants can theoretically lower the demand for oil. I doubt that's what they meant, though ;)
The atmosphere has about 1/1000 of the mass of the outer (molten) core. Temperature is average energy per unit mass. So if you want the average global temperature up by 100 Kelvin so all the water boils off, that'll involve transferring enough energy from the outer core to lower it by, 0.1 Kelvin? (Except that obviously the crust and oceans are absorbing heat from the air...still, the oceans and surface are pretty light compared to the core, too, so you get a number more like 10 K cooler core = boiling surface. 10K being enough to freeze a bunch of the outer core, but not to the point of magnetosphere collapse) So, 2 happens well before 1. But does 2 happen? No. Geothermal heat is no different than coal heat or nuclear heat. It heats the air, but the air is in thermal equilibrium with the sun, and so being hotter means it emits more energy (blackbody radiation, yo) and cools off, balance is restored. It gets complicated because hotter air alters the vapor pressure equilibrium with surface water, so that means more clouds (higher atmospheric albedo, so less solar radiation absorbed by the surface) but it also means more water vapor in the air (as a polar molecule, water lets most sunlight through unmolested, but when the blackbody infrared from the surface/air hits it, it gets absorbed and remitted so a portion of the spaceward infrared ends up coming back to the surface, further mucking up the nice simple thermal equilibrium equations in a non-linear manner, which frankly is just plain rude). But unless we start replacing gigawatt powerplants with 1000 terrawatt geothermal stations, it's not going to alter the average air temperature. Because we're already emitting heat, and it doesn't do a damn thing to the temperature. More or less the atmosphere is in equilibrium, and adding energy directly cannot disrupt that equilibrium.
Hyperthreading! With 8 physical cores, the OS sees 16 logical cores. 16 threads can be running at once. Though technically only 8 are running because there aren't extra copies of the adders, multipliers, etc, whenever one is waiting on memory, or stalled because a branch miss-prediction emptied the pipeline, etc. then the other thread can run instantly. Normally it's stupid to context switch due to a branch error or cache miss, since probably that will be resolved before you can finish the very expensive context switch operation. Having two sets of registers and such allows for instant switching between which of the two logical cores is being handled by the physical core, so any time either thread is waiting on memory, the other thread can get some work done. And whenever it's stalled on something that actually would require a context switch normally, it can be handed off to the other one while that switch is occurring. It's not nearly as good as having 16 physical cores, but usually you get about 30% more CPU time squeezed in be doing this. 4 hours * 1.30 = 5.2 hours. Seems consistent to me.
Actually, that IS what they say. It's Slashdot that modified the quote to look bad. (They also changed 25 minutes into 5 hours).
So you are proposing government mandated elimination of security measures? Do you by chance make a living by phishing?
Yes, that is what the documentation says. But Microsoft tech support says "per organization", and the people who had the problem said that when they hit the limit, the entire company was shut off, not just the one employee.
Except that the law defines a debt as an something that is owed and must be paid. When I ask for a ticket to a movie and the clerk says "$10 please" that is not a debt because I don't HAVE to pay it, I can back out of the transaction at no cost. When I buy a prepay card for my cellphone, that's not a debt because I can say "Actually, never mind!" When I get a cellphone bill for my not-prepay cell, that is a debt because I the service was rendered, I must pay it. If I rent an apartment, the damage deposit is not a debt because I can always say "Actually I live in a van down by the river". But the rent is a debt because without my legal notice (this obviously depends on state rental law) I can't just say "Not paying this month, bye". If I line up all night, get an iPhone 4S, and go to pay, that's not a debt even though I'm already holding the phone in my hand. But if I rage at being told I can't pay cash, and smash up a window, and they send me a bill, that is a debt because I can't just say "Just kidding, the window is fine!" You can play stupid word games all you want, talking about how technically you are taking a 5 second loan out, but it's bullshit. It's just like drug dealers who say "I'm just selling bags, whatever is inside is just filler"
So when Apple refuses to accept cash for an iPhone, they are breaking the law? When a movie theater refuses to accept $100 bills, they are breaking the law? When a gas station refuses to accept $45 in pennies, they are breaking the law? And when I take a chocolate bar from a store, I'm not stealing it? I'm just incurring a debt and then missing my payment deadline. So, that's a civil matter, not criminal, and I guess all lawyers defending people for shoplifting are just awful for not bringing that point up.
It shouldn't. The crux of the ruling is that the content can change, and even if it doesn't there's no evidence that you read every last word on the page. Therefore, just posting a link to a site that says something defamatory doesn't constitute republishing or endorsing that statement. However, if you have a content aggregator, it's pretty damn obvious exactly what it's linking to. Because it's not just presenting links to some all gibberish URL, it's naming that link after the copyrighted content at that tracker, complete with file size, duration, and all that stuff. You cannot make the defense that "it's just a link I didn't know what it was to!" when you list exactly what it's linking to.
No, the ruling still allows for a link to be defamatory if the intent is apparent. The reasoning behind the ruling is that if you link to a page, it can be changed by the host so it is senseless to view the link as your endorsement of all past and future content. Say, you link to a guy's blog and he makes a defamatory post after you link to it. Or, you link to it because you like what he said today, but further down on the page you linked he has defamatory posts you didn't notice.
However, ruling that having a link does not constitute endorsement of the content of the link doesn't make all links OK. If context makes your endorsement apparent, then just because it's a link does not protect you.
Well, at least I got that number from somewhere, right? :(
Encrypted search works without being signed in. It's also 4 months old. The news is they are making it default for signed in users, not that it exists.
Yes. The angular momentum of a top is the sum of the angular momentum of all of the atoms that make it up. That's their motion around an axis, plus the orbital momentum of the electrons, plus the spins of the electrons and quarks. Since (as far as I know) you can't transform subatomic spin into motion through space, it's usually completely ignored. But, spin and angular momentum are nevertheless considered to be the same thing still. They should average out to zero in any object of interest, so it doesn't really matter at all. Same thing here. The momentum of our galaxy is the rotation of the stars around the center of the galaxy, plus the rotation of the stars themselves. But the stars rotation is pretty minor compared to the total, so it's not important. Since there isn't really a "center" of the universe, then there's no term to "dominate" the rotation of the galaxies, so the "angular momentum" of the universe is the sum of that of the galaxies.
Obese mothers have obese children, even surrogate mothers! It has to do with gene activation. Being obese activates certain genes that make it easier to become obese (hence the unfortunate positive feedback effect of being overweight). This gene activation also occurs in utero. Or it does in mice, anyway. So there is certainly a potential causative link between adult obesity and infant obesity, based on mouse studies.
"I was almost hit by a car yesterday"
"Statistically, there's no way you would still be alive if you were hit by a car every single day. What a lair!"
Yes, you read that. It was written by the submitter, not by the judge or by the lawyers. The judge said that the Federal government is not bound by State statues. And so even if in that particular state there's a law that says stolen property becomes the property of the possessor after X amount of time, these laws do not apply to Federal property. But that's not as nice of an anti-government soundbite, so obviously some words had to be excised.
That's probably better than thinking irony is feigning ignorance in order to make no point whatsoever.
Yes indeed, we can't add a few bytes of accelerometer data to a 10 megapixel image, that would make those images too large!
It's well established in the gaming community. Publishers and developers have been screaming it non-stop at the top of their lungs for years now, and most fans agree completely. In fact they say that used games are worse than piracy. Even Penny Arcade has said that buying second hand is closer to literally stealing than it is to piracy. Their position on why used record stores aren't stealing is that "games are budgeted on the assumption of no used game sales, and books and albums aren't." As video rental chains go out of business, there are fewer and fewer deep pockets to fight against the total removal of the doctrine of first sale.
A tank engine is a type of steam locomotive. It's called that because it carries its water in a tank that's on-board, rather than in the coal car. They are pretty distinctive in appearance because of the long cylindrical tank that makes up most of the engine. Shining Time Station used them as characters because the flat end of the tank sticking out the front was perfect for drawing a face on ;)