A company spokesman said it's not a big deal because they have no intent to censor criticism. AT&T claims to respect its subscribers' right to voice their opinions
Then it won't be a problem removing it, now will it? Especially since existing tort law covers libel?
Any time someone says "oh, we don't intend to use that clause, ignore it", the correct answer is "I don't intend to take a verbal assurance you won't exercise a contractually granted right."
Any time someone insists on guaranteeing something off the record or verbally instead of in the contract you are negotiating there is a reason, especially when their statements contradict terms in the contract.
It seems like a lot of the tech writers in big media don't bother doing the type of digging that PJ is known for and instead wait for her to do a most of the real work before they decide whether or not to voice their own opinions.
Strike the bit about "deciding whether or not to voice their own opinions" and you perfectly describe the "blogging" community.
To me, that's like asking, "Do you want the wrench that works with the Edsel, or the one that doesn't?"
The Edsel was a commercial failure (wikipedia says, "The car brand is best known as one of the most spectacular failures in the history of the United States automobile industry"), so...how exactly is your analogy relevant given that Windows is the dominant operating system?
I have heard that many of the smarter Americans go into medicine or the law
Medicine is not the place to go - there is an insane glut of grad students and postdocs. Competition is extremely fierce. If you're thinking of going for any sort of specialty practice- forget it. Everyone wants to be a *insert narrow specialty* doctor; nobody wants to be a general practitioner or go into pediatrics where we really need doctors. So, we have 50 zillion hand surgeons, and a line a mile out the doors of all the family docs.
As for medical research - our lab is chock full of foreign students. The lab director prefers them because they're basically slaves- they want desperately to be in the US, and the lab holds their visa. They'll put up with shit pay, no/little credit for their work, insane hours, and unreasonable demands. They're just happy to be on US soil.
Someone told me once that the lab couldn't attract US candidates because said candidates were going for higher profile, better paying positions.
If you want to be successful coming out of grad school- go for engineering, either mechanical or electrical. Big shortages predicted in both fields, from what I've heard.
Whatever you do, skip research - unless you look forward to flushing several years of your life down the drain to help some professor reel in a research grant, who'll barely care to list your name on the paper. And that's *if* the research isn't scooped by another lab...
That's pretty much the standard nowadays. Who is going to spend time and money making things better when you can just sue the whiners for complaining?
No. If you read the original filing, they're complaining that it is possibly another company posting comments in a campaign against them AND that the reviews contain false information.
Given that legal action is fairly expensive, I presume that they had enough evidence of both claims to at least satisfy themselves it was worth the expense, risk of countersuit(s), and potential fallout (ie negative publicity and such.)
Even if you sue someone, the court isn't going to just hand you a big check because you say "they made up shit about us!"; you have to prove that the claims were false and malicious to qualify for libel.
"Instead of addressing the concerns the Video Professor has decided to take the litigious route."
No, they brought their claims to civil court under tort law. Tort exists precisely for the purpose of settling claims like this.
The original complaint, which is buried (thanks to linking to a blog, which links to a blog, etc...why can't you people cite original sources? Christ), asserts that customers, or a competitor, are maliciously posting reviews (ie, reverse astroturfing) with false information.
It's not up to a bunch of yahoos on the interbutt to decide if they meet the burden of proof in a civil case (which is much lower than a criminal case) on these two issues. The court decides whether to give them a court order seeking records on their posters.
It's also up to Video Professor to prove that the posts are false. If they are, guess what kiddies! That's libel, and yeah, shockingly, it is NOT legal to public false information maliciously.
In short, stop bitching and let the judiciary do their job, which is to dismiss the lawsuit if it is frivolous, or let it proceed to discovery, etc. Do any of you realize how stupid you sound complaining about tort law, which has existed as a key part of societies for several centuries, almost the world over?
So how does a meteor, which is usually cold if not frozen, generate a steam cloud large enough to make a whole lot people sick? Numerous websites cover this if you google "meteor hot or cold." Even NASA's website says that the meteor's outer surface usually heats up and ablates, leaving the core still very cold.
There's an alternate theory going around- a Peruvian SCUD missile gone awry, and the fuel (Inhibited Fuming Red Nitric Acid) is what made people sick.
Someone edited my story and added sensationalist quotes I could swear I didn't include. Oh, and added a link to Boing Boing, which was pretty pointless, given I linked to an actual newspaper.
Key facts:
She was wearing an electronic circuit board taped to her chest which contained an assortment of wires, components, LEDs, and a battery.
She was holding a "putty like" substance in her hand which could easily be viewed as plastic explosives.
She approached an airport employee, asked for information about a specific flight. The employee asked about the circuit board on her chest, and she turned around and walked away without answering.
Airport security responded to the description of what sounded like a suicide bomber.
I am rabidly for freedom, privacy, and personal rights. I'm quite set against abusive use of police force. This was not even remotely an unreasonable action by the airport police, and it has NOTHING in common with the whole "mooninite" incident, save similarities in the type of device.
FLIR camera is probably for monitoring the trains and making sure they are on schedule.
...because the signaling system doesn't do that already?
There are even automated announcements on the platforms about ~45-60 seconds before the train pulls into the station. I suspect the camera is to spot "ter'rists", since in that direction lies the Flee...I mean, TD Banknorth Garden, and the I-93 tunnel.
A drop in crime is evidence that the cameras work.
An increase in crime is evidence that more cameras are necessary.
You forgot one: "unchanging crime levels mean the cameras kept crime from getting worse, and removing them would mean an explosion of crime." It'd be like firing cops; no politician who wants to keep his or her office would dare do it, even if it a sound decision. The slightest crime, and victims will blame the official, and the press will be more than happy to stick the microphone in front of their face while they do it.
The MBTA (which shockingly reversed its decades-old policy of prohibiting cameras on MBTA property) had been going nuts installing "high resolution digital cameras" around the system. Not anywhere on the platforms, mind you- but at the fare gates.
They blew a lot of smoke to the two competing pulp-journalism freebies (Metro and "Boston Now", which litter the system) about how great the cameras were, how they'd catch anyone jumping fares, etc. Grabauskas bragged about the "high resolution" cameras, and both rags printed images of a guy kicking a gate in (yep. They're that weak- a decent kick will take them out of commission.) The photo was embarassingly bad- you could barely tell it was a guy, and barely ID what he was wearing. The image was low-resolution, blurry, over-compressed, and full of noise.
Oh, and they didn't seem to help when two kids shot up another kid on the Orange line (the MBTA police's response was to transfer the entire trainload of passengers onto busses and hold them for pat-down searches. This was despite witnesses repeatedly stating that the two shooters immediately fled the scene and left the station. They still haven't been found, months later.)
Also, if you're in North Station on the platform for outbound, take a look at the couple of cameras situated at the end of the platform closest to the "Garden". You'll note one is a FLIR camera, pointed into the tunnel. What the hell for?
North Station is also where the MBTA police regularly conduct forced "screenings", usually during rush-hour. For those who don't know: North Station is where people transfer from the orange/green lines to the commuter lines to get home. The MBTA police, like complete idiots, park their vehicles up in front of the station (which is a giant "hey, there's a "random search" thing going on here!" sign), and then stop people trying to get home (where missing a train can mean you don't get home for another 1-2 hours or more.)
Your source is the "Officer Down Memorial Page." Try sourcing the FBI instead.
2005 accidental deaths, total of 67 deaths for the year. 39 in automobile accidents, with another 11 struck and killed by vehicles and another 4 killed in motorcycle accidents. That's 54 out of 67.
Felonious deaths? 55 TOTAL.
When one specific cause of accidental deaths matches the entire category of felonious deaths, yeah- I'd call that "overwhelming."
Google has finally launched their online presentation tool to complete its office offerings at Google Docs."
Why this will never take off:
First- no presenter in their right mind wants to rely on the internet to deliver a presentation. We tell people to have a copy ready on at LEAST one other kind of media, especially if they're giving a big talk. I know people who spread important presentations across multiple media, which is spread across their luggage when traveling. Ie, the presentation is on their USB key in their pocket, but also on a CD in case the key is broken (for example, maybe the plane ride is bumpy and the seatbelt causes the drive's connector to snap off.) We even have them put it on their webmail account in case they lose *everything* for some reason.
But...do the presentation requiring second-to-second internet access to work? Bwahahahahahaahaa.
Second- even if you can export it (for example, as a PDF), very few if any PDF viewers support dual-monitor layout. Powerpoint and Keynote, the biggest presentation tools, both support a "presenter display" on the second monitor; you can see things like a preview of the next slide, a presentation timer+clock, your notes for the current slide- or all of the above.
The guy is a journalism student. He knew that his actions were going to get publicity. He knew what was going to happen if he acted out. Really, what was his motive???
Since when was "being an attention whore" deserving of intense pain and possible fatal force (google it- tasers cause quite a number of deaths. They're NOT "non" lethal.)
Was he acting like a dick? Yes. Was he resisting arrest? Yes. Was he a threat to officers, the public, or himself? No, and thus they should have struggled with him to get him into cuffs, not just tasered him.
There is the temptation these days to develop a hero complex around police and fire, especially after "9/11" (where many, many, MANY more "civilians" were killed than police/fire personnel.) The popular political line is something like "we don't want to put our police in danger."
To me, the rights of the public at large vastly outweigh those of someone who consciously chooses a job which is perceived to be dangerous; you want to be a cop? Take the risk that, during an arrest, you might (heaven forbid) get an elbow to your face and a black eye. We'd have a lot less Rescue Rogers running around if this were the prevailing public attitude.
PS: Number on cause of fatalities, overwhelmingly, for police? Traffic accidents. Murder rate for police officers? ONE THIRD THE RATE OF THE GENERAL POPULACE.
In celebration of this milestone they will also be launching a new consortium dedicated to preserving and evolving this standard for years to come.
That's a wonderful bit of spin.
My from-the-hip guess is that MIT has realized that they're a)dependent on Kerberos and b)nobody else uses it, so they need to generate some noise, make some unfounded claims, and hope to get some other people onboard. "Used in the enterprise"? Bullshit...
Kerberos was an idea for a time when nobody used SSL, nobody had SSH, VPNs were proprietary and could only be done on specialized hardware, and yp/nfs was still considered "acceptable."
Kerberos is an 8-track technology in a MP3 world where one can use an ssh client to proxy any SOCKS client, while mounting their home directory via SSHfs, while tunneling all their IP traffic (yep, latest openssh does full IP tunneling!)
I knew MIT had officially jumped the shark when I saw an alarm clock covered in shag rug with wheels touted as "brilliant", when it was something on the level of kitsch I'd expect from some no-name third-world electronics company.
Another great example of MIT's failure to generate students who have useful, applicable knowledge would be when their underwater robotics team, despite supposedly being the best+brightest, backed by sponsorship from the biggest defense contractors and oil companies...got their asses handed to them by a bunch of high school students from East Nowhere.
Methinks one reason IPv6 hasn't been adopted is because those who have chunks of the IPv4 space are quite happy having what is essentially an artificially precious resource.
Most people think the IP address space is "nearly full", but a handful of companies are sitting on prime real estate (nevermind there is a huge amount of "reserved" space which is not in use.) For example, why do the following companies have entire class A's to themselves?
Ford
Prudential Securities
Department of Social Security of UK (WTF?)
Eli Lily and Company
Haliburton
Defense Information Systems Agency has FOUR, YES, FOUR, ENTIRE CLASS A's
That's something many environmental types love to ignore. They spend large amounts of money on things that have pretty small environmental benefits, and then say "every little bit counts" and so forth. Whereas what they should be asking is "how could I spend this money so as to do the most good/least damage to the environment?"
"They" are "ignoring it" because trees aren't the largest source of oxygen on the planet- phytoplankton in the oceans are. I've seen numbers as high as 90%, but I think most scientists would agree it is "more than half."
They" are "ignoring it" because trees don't remove industrial pollutants, they don't bring much in the way of renewable energy (they do have lots of side benefits, like preventing erosion, providing habitat for ecosystems, shading the ground and buildings from solar radiation in hot areas, providing renewable construction materials, etc) and so on. Planting trees does jack shit to address the pollution from power plants (more than a third of the United States electricity comes from coal, of which the soot contains radioactive particles among other things), planes, trains, and trucks.
The problem here is not that manufacturers aren't trying; it's that these companies make a business out of reselling other people's stuff. That Dell laptop was not actually designed by Dell; Apple is one of the few companies to design in-house. Dell goes shopping each year in Asia and sees what OEM laptops it likes, and then slaps their label on 'em.
What is needed is a company other than Advanced Energy Group slapping a $1400 price tag on what is essentially:
A $30 cart with wheels and a handle
A $600 dollar solar panel (120W Sunwise)
$50-100 in batteries (2-3 car batteries will do in a pinch. AGMs are a little more expensive.)
A $30 inverter
A $30 charge controller (not sure on this one, but you can get pretty cheap+simple if need be.)
Far as I can see, they're making a 100% profit margin ON TOP OF RETAIL PRICES for all those components. The problem with most solar "technologies" is that everyone is exceptionally greedy. If they priced the stuff with more reasonable profit margins, they'd sell quite a bit more of 'em.
'It's regrettable that Verizon has decided to use the court system to try to prevent consumers from having any choice of innovative services. Once again, it is American consumers who lose from these tactics.'"
That's pretty funny, coming from a company which prohibited its Adword customers from discussing anything about the Adwords program with others.
Google late paying you one month? Don't post anything about it on your website, or boom, you weren't a customer anymore. I took a quick glace through the terms and couldn't find it; maybe they finally nix'd it.
PS: We're not CONSUMERS. We are PEOPLE, who MAY be CUSTOMERS.
I'd imagine being slowly hacked to death with machetes in Rwanda or fed into a paper shredder in Baghdad by Uday and Qusay might have been a little less pleasant.......
We're not talking about torture, we're talking about deployed weapons.
Regardless, burns are the most painful injuries you can possibly suffer from. Hacking off a limb doesn't even come close to the pain of burning it.
preads a high incendiary vapour cloud over a wide area and then ignites it, creating an ultra-sonic shock wave and searing fireball that destroys everything in its wake.
Here's a slightly more accurate description of what it does....to people.
People unlucky enough to be within the actual fuel-air mixture area are set on fire, both internally (lungs- they breathe in the fuel/air mixture) and externally (the infrared radiation immediately ignites their clothing, hair, and skin) while suffocating. That's pretty much the most painful way to die, hands down, that I can think of.
Anyone within the shockwave and following vacuum is liable to either be thrown against other objects or be crushed by them, or structures that collapse. This is the greatest hope you have, as it is the quickest potential way to die.
Anyone unfortunate enough to not be burned alive or crushed, will suffer from the pain of blown eardrums and collapsed or burst lungs, while simultaneously suffocating because all the air around them is devoid of oxygen; the fire consumed it. Oh, and everything around you that is flammable is burning whatever oxygen might be left.
They're indiscriminate and quite possibly the cruelest way of killing people save WW1-era chemical attacks.
The fact that the US and Russia are the only countries to use and develop them should speak volumes.
The most conservative estimates at the time by the US Military estimated that an invasion of the home islands would have cost at least 500,000 civilian Japanese lives. That's conservative, mind you.
This is a myth commonly and often repeated, used by teachers to qualm the guilt middle schoolers feel when watching videos of our country blowing up tens of thousands of civilians. It's easy to picture "those evil japs" fighting to the death with pitchforks and samurai swords against "our boys" for "honor" and to "save the emperor", which is why it made for great propaganda, playing to the racism of WW2 vets and their families, for a good 40 or 50 years.
The fact is that Japanese war machine was so run down they were sending pilots on suicide missions because of a lack of fuel and weapons. Said pilots were not exactly thrilled at the prospect; most of them did it only because the knew they'd be shot if they didn't. Military leadership was very divided on whether the war should continue. For months, some were deeply worried about open revolt leading to revolution among the general populace, which was tired of war, tired of hearing their sons died. Sound familiar?
The use of nuclear weapons to end a war which was largely won, was the greatest display in foolish use of military might.
. You'd assume he'd just get on the radio but if it's an old Bellanca, there may be no battery power available, in a new Bellanca the fault that stopped the engine may also prevent the radio from working.
Please don't post unless you know what you're talking about.
ALL civilian aircraft save military, experimental, and balloons have ELTs which are powered off a separate, self-contained battery. The system can be manually triggered if it wasn't triggered by an impact.
The ELTs are monitored via satellite (they'll stop monitoring the older ones around 2010 or thereabouts), so remoteness is irrelevant for signal detection. The geography and clear air probably make it a lot *easier* to spot, not harder...provided he didn't crash into a steep canyon. A search plane flying at high altitude over any reasonable flight paths should be able to detect the signal easily.
Given the man's personal worth, I would expect that he very well had an EPIRB device or a modern ELT (the older ones aren't very good.) Hell, I'd be amazed if he didn't have a satphone as well.
I read the blog that slashdot linked to. Aside from explaining that car manufacturers don't want to sell the more costly vehicles in non-"green" states, he doesn't explain anywhere HOW this is actually illegal; he just says the EPA Clean Air Act makes it illegal, without a single citation, quote of the Act, etc. Apparently Volvo wrote this letter saying "It's illegal!" and everyone else is believing them.
I have yet to find anything in the CAA that says "you can't sell a low-emissions vehicle outside California or Massachusetts" (or NY, which, incidentally, is NOT PART OF NEW ENGLAND...)
In fact, I found the following:
(f) Voluntary Opt-In for Other States.-
(1) EPA regulations.- Not later than 2 years after the
enactment of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, the
Administrator shall promulgate regulations establishing a
voluntary opt-in program under this subsection pursuant to
which-
(A) clean-fuel vehicles which are required to be
produced, sold, and distributed in the State of California
under this section, and
(B) clean alternative fuels required to be produced and
distributed under this section by fuel suppliers and made
available in California
may also be sold and used in other States which submit plan
revisions under paragraph (2).
Slashdot Mirror
A company spokesman said it's not a big deal because they have no intent to censor criticism. AT&T claims to respect its subscribers' right to voice their opinions
Then it won't be a problem removing it, now will it? Especially since existing tort law covers libel?
Any time someone says "oh, we don't intend to use that clause, ignore it", the correct answer is "I don't intend to take a verbal assurance you won't exercise a contractually granted right."
Any time someone insists on guaranteeing something off the record or verbally instead of in the contract you are negotiating there is a reason, especially when their statements contradict terms in the contract.
I just wish there was a better option than AT&T in my area. (T-Mobile doesn't work 5 feet into my house.)
That's highly unlikely, given the tower-sharing and roaming agreements beween TMobile and AT&T/Cingular.
You're seeing a difference in handset capabilities, not providers.
It seems like a lot of the tech writers in big media don't bother doing the type of digging that PJ is known for and instead wait for her to do a most of the real work before they decide whether or not to voice their own opinions.
Strike the bit about "deciding whether or not to voice their own opinions" and you perfectly describe the "blogging" community.
To me, that's like asking, "Do you want the wrench that works with the Edsel, or the one that doesn't?"
The Edsel was a commercial failure (wikipedia says, "The car brand is best known as one of the most spectacular failures in the history of the United States automobile industry"), so...how exactly is your analogy relevant given that Windows is the dominant operating system?
I have heard that many of the smarter Americans go into medicine or the law
Medicine is not the place to go - there is an insane glut of grad students and postdocs. Competition is extremely fierce. If you're thinking of going for any sort of specialty practice- forget it. Everyone wants to be a *insert narrow specialty* doctor; nobody wants to be a general practitioner or go into pediatrics where we really need doctors. So, we have 50 zillion hand surgeons, and a line a mile out the doors of all the family docs.
As for medical research - our lab is chock full of foreign students. The lab director prefers them because they're basically slaves- they want desperately to be in the US, and the lab holds their visa. They'll put up with shit pay, no/little credit for their work, insane hours, and unreasonable demands. They're just happy to be on US soil.
Someone told me once that the lab couldn't attract US candidates because said candidates were going for higher profile, better paying positions.
If you want to be successful coming out of grad school- go for engineering, either mechanical or electrical. Big shortages predicted in both fields, from what I've heard.
Whatever you do, skip research - unless you look forward to flushing several years of your life down the drain to help some professor reel in a research grant, who'll barely care to list your name on the paper. And that's *if* the research isn't scooped by another lab...
So far there has been no comment on how a Linux user group is going to help sorority girls with their Windows machines
Lots of protection.
That's pretty much the standard nowadays. Who is going to spend time and money making things better when you can just sue the whiners for complaining?
No. If you read the original filing, they're complaining that it is possibly another company posting comments in a campaign against them AND that the reviews contain false information.
Given that legal action is fairly expensive, I presume that they had enough evidence of both claims to at least satisfy themselves it was worth the expense, risk of countersuit(s), and potential fallout (ie negative publicity and such.)
Even if you sue someone, the court isn't going to just hand you a big check because you say "they made up shit about us!"; you have to prove that the claims were false and malicious to qualify for libel.
"Instead of addressing the concerns the Video Professor has decided to take the litigious route."
No, they brought their claims to civil court under tort law. Tort exists precisely for the purpose of settling claims like this.
The original complaint, which is buried (thanks to linking to a blog, which links to a blog, etc...why can't you people cite original sources? Christ), asserts that customers, or a competitor, are maliciously posting reviews (ie, reverse astroturfing) with false information.
It's not up to a bunch of yahoos on the interbutt to decide if they meet the burden of proof in a civil case (which is much lower than a criminal case) on these two issues. The court decides whether to give them a court order seeking records on their posters.
It's also up to Video Professor to prove that the posts are false. If they are, guess what kiddies! That's libel, and yeah, shockingly, it is NOT legal to public false information maliciously.
In short, stop bitching and let the judiciary do their job, which is to dismiss the lawsuit if it is frivolous, or let it proceed to discovery, etc. Do any of you realize how stupid you sound complaining about tort law, which has existed as a key part of societies for several centuries, almost the world over?
There's an alternate theory going around- a Peruvian SCUD missile gone awry, and the fuel (Inhibited Fuming Red Nitric Acid) is what made people sick.
Spot on.
Key facts:
I am rabidly for freedom, privacy, and personal rights. I'm quite set against abusive use of police force. This was not even remotely an unreasonable action by the airport police, and it has NOTHING in common with the whole "mooninite" incident, save similarities in the type of device.
FLIR camera is probably for monitoring the trains and making sure they are on schedule.
...because the signaling system doesn't do that already?
There are even automated announcements on the platforms about ~45-60 seconds before the train pulls into the station. I suspect the camera is to spot "ter'rists", since in that direction lies the Flee...I mean, TD Banknorth Garden, and the I-93 tunnel.
A drop in crime is evidence that the cameras work. An increase in crime is evidence that more cameras are necessary.
You forgot one: "unchanging crime levels mean the cameras kept crime from getting worse, and removing them would mean an explosion of crime." It'd be like firing cops; no politician who wants to keep his or her office would dare do it, even if it a sound decision. The slightest crime, and victims will blame the official, and the press will be more than happy to stick the microphone in front of their face while they do it.
The MBTA (which shockingly reversed its decades-old policy of prohibiting cameras on MBTA property) had been going nuts installing "high resolution digital cameras" around the system. Not anywhere on the platforms, mind you- but at the fare gates.
They blew a lot of smoke to the two competing pulp-journalism freebies (Metro and "Boston Now", which litter the system) about how great the cameras were, how they'd catch anyone jumping fares, etc. Grabauskas bragged about the "high resolution" cameras, and both rags printed images of a guy kicking a gate in (yep. They're that weak- a decent kick will take them out of commission.) The photo was embarassingly bad- you could barely tell it was a guy, and barely ID what he was wearing. The image was low-resolution, blurry, over-compressed, and full of noise.
Oh, and they didn't seem to help when two kids shot up another kid on the Orange line (the MBTA police's response was to transfer the entire trainload of passengers onto busses and hold them for pat-down searches. This was despite witnesses repeatedly stating that the two shooters immediately fled the scene and left the station. They still haven't been found, months later.)
Also, if you're in North Station on the platform for outbound, take a look at the couple of cameras situated at the end of the platform closest to the "Garden". You'll note one is a FLIR camera, pointed into the tunnel. What the hell for?
North Station is also where the MBTA police regularly conduct forced "screenings", usually during rush-hour. For those who don't know: North Station is where people transfer from the orange/green lines to the commuter lines to get home. The MBTA police, like complete idiots, park their vehicles up in front of the station (which is a giant "hey, there's a "random search" thing going on here!" sign), and then stop people trying to get home (where missing a train can mean you don't get home for another 1-2 hours or more.)
Your source is the "Officer Down Memorial Page." Try sourcing the FBI instead.
2005 accidental deaths, total of 67 deaths for the year. 39 in automobile accidents, with another 11 struck and killed by vehicles and another 4 killed in motorcycle accidents. That's 54 out of 67.
Felonious deaths? 55 TOTAL.
When one specific cause of accidental deaths matches the entire category of felonious deaths, yeah- I'd call that "overwhelming."
Google has finally launched their online presentation tool to complete its office offerings at Google Docs."
Why this will never take off:
First- no presenter in their right mind wants to rely on the internet to deliver a presentation. We tell people to have a copy ready on at LEAST one other kind of media, especially if they're giving a big talk. I know people who spread important presentations across multiple media, which is spread across their luggage when traveling. Ie, the presentation is on their USB key in their pocket, but also on a CD in case the key is broken (for example, maybe the plane ride is bumpy and the seatbelt causes the drive's connector to snap off.) We even have them put it on their webmail account in case they lose *everything* for some reason.
But...do the presentation requiring second-to-second internet access to work? Bwahahahahahaahaa.
Second- even if you can export it (for example, as a PDF), very few if any PDF viewers support dual-monitor layout. Powerpoint and Keynote, the biggest presentation tools, both support a "presenter display" on the second monitor; you can see things like a preview of the next slide, a presentation timer+clock, your notes for the current slide- or all of the above.
The guy is a journalism student. He knew that his actions were going to get publicity. He knew what was going to happen if he acted out. Really, what was his motive???
Since when was "being an attention whore" deserving of intense pain and possible fatal force (google it- tasers cause quite a number of deaths. They're NOT "non" lethal.)
Was he acting like a dick? Yes. Was he resisting arrest? Yes. Was he a threat to officers, the public, or himself? No, and thus they should have struggled with him to get him into cuffs, not just tasered him.
There is the temptation these days to develop a hero complex around police and fire, especially after "9/11" (where many, many, MANY more "civilians" were killed than police/fire personnel.) The popular political line is something like "we don't want to put our police in danger."
To me, the rights of the public at large vastly outweigh those of someone who consciously chooses a job which is perceived to be dangerous; you want to be a cop? Take the risk that, during an arrest, you might (heaven forbid) get an elbow to your face and a black eye. We'd have a lot less Rescue Rogers running around if this were the prevailing public attitude.
PS: Number on cause of fatalities, overwhelmingly, for police? Traffic accidents. Murder rate for police officers? ONE THIRD THE RATE OF THE GENERAL POPULACE.
In celebration of this milestone they will also be launching a new consortium dedicated to preserving and evolving this standard for years to come.
That's a wonderful bit of spin.
My from-the-hip guess is that MIT has realized that they're a)dependent on Kerberos and b)nobody else uses it, so they need to generate some noise, make some unfounded claims, and hope to get some other people onboard. "Used in the enterprise"? Bullshit...
Kerberos was an idea for a time when nobody used SSL, nobody had SSH, VPNs were proprietary and could only be done on specialized hardware, and yp/nfs was still considered "acceptable."
Kerberos is an 8-track technology in a MP3 world where one can use an ssh client to proxy any SOCKS client, while mounting their home directory via SSHfs, while tunneling all their IP traffic (yep, latest openssh does full IP tunneling!)
I knew MIT had officially jumped the shark when I saw an alarm clock covered in shag rug with wheels touted as "brilliant", when it was something on the level of kitsch I'd expect from some no-name third-world electronics company.
Another great example of MIT's failure to generate students who have useful, applicable knowledge would be when their underwater robotics team, despite supposedly being the best+brightest, backed by sponsorship from the biggest defense contractors and oil companies...got their asses handed to them by a bunch of high school students from East Nowhere.
a gargantuan address space,
Methinks one reason IPv6 hasn't been adopted is because those who have chunks of the IPv4 space are quite happy having what is essentially an artificially precious resource.
Most people think the IP address space is "nearly full", but a handful of companies are sitting on prime real estate (nevermind there is a huge amount of "reserved" space which is not in use.) For example, why do the following companies have entire class A's to themselves?
That's something many environmental types love to ignore. They spend large amounts of money on things that have pretty small environmental benefits, and then say "every little bit counts" and so forth. Whereas what they should be asking is "how could I spend this money so as to do the most good/least damage to the environment?"
"They" are "ignoring it" because trees aren't the largest source of oxygen on the planet- phytoplankton in the oceans are. I've seen numbers as high as 90%, but I think most scientists would agree it is "more than half."
They" are "ignoring it" because trees don't remove industrial pollutants, they don't bring much in the way of renewable energy (they do have lots of side benefits, like preventing erosion, providing habitat for ecosystems, shading the ground and buildings from solar radiation in hot areas, providing renewable construction materials, etc) and so on. Planting trees does jack shit to address the pollution from power plants (more than a third of the United States electricity comes from coal, of which the soot contains radioactive particles among other things), planes, trains, and trucks.
The problem here is not that manufacturers aren't trying; it's that these companies make a business out of reselling other people's stuff. That Dell laptop was not actually designed by Dell; Apple is one of the few companies to design in-house. Dell goes shopping each year in Asia and sees what OEM laptops it likes, and then slaps their label on 'em.
What is needed is a company other than Advanced Energy Group slapping a $1400 price tag on what is essentially:
Far as I can see, they're making a 100% profit margin ON TOP OF RETAIL PRICES for all those components. The problem with most solar "technologies" is that everyone is exceptionally greedy. If they priced the stuff with more reasonable profit margins, they'd sell quite a bit more of 'em.
'It's regrettable that Verizon has decided to use the court system to try to prevent consumers from having any choice of innovative services. Once again, it is American consumers who lose from these tactics.'"
That's pretty funny, coming from a company which prohibited its Adword customers from discussing anything about the Adwords program with others.
Google late paying you one month? Don't post anything about it on your website, or boom, you weren't a customer anymore. I took a quick glace through the terms and couldn't find it; maybe they finally nix'd it.
PS: We're not CONSUMERS. We are PEOPLE, who MAY be CUSTOMERS.
I'd imagine being slowly hacked to death with machetes in Rwanda or fed into a paper shredder in Baghdad by Uday and Qusay might have been a little less pleasant.......
We're not talking about torture, we're talking about deployed weapons.
Regardless, burns are the most painful injuries you can possibly suffer from. Hacking off a limb doesn't even come close to the pain of burning it.
preads a high incendiary vapour cloud over a wide area and then ignites it, creating an ultra-sonic shock wave and searing fireball that destroys everything in its wake.
Here's a slightly more accurate description of what it does....to people.
They're indiscriminate and quite possibly the cruelest way of killing people save WW1-era chemical attacks.
The fact that the US and Russia are the only countries to use and develop them should speak volumes.
The most conservative estimates at the time by the US Military estimated that an invasion of the home islands would have cost at least 500,000 civilian Japanese lives. That's conservative, mind you.
This is a myth commonly and often repeated, used by teachers to qualm the guilt middle schoolers feel when watching videos of our country blowing up tens of thousands of civilians. It's easy to picture "those evil japs" fighting to the death with pitchforks and samurai swords against "our boys" for "honor" and to "save the emperor", which is why it made for great propaganda, playing to the racism of WW2 vets and their families, for a good 40 or 50 years.
The fact is that Japanese war machine was so run down they were sending pilots on suicide missions because of a lack of fuel and weapons. Said pilots were not exactly thrilled at the prospect; most of them did it only because the knew they'd be shot if they didn't. Military leadership was very divided on whether the war should continue. For months, some were deeply worried about open revolt leading to revolution among the general populace, which was tired of war, tired of hearing their sons died. Sound familiar?
The use of nuclear weapons to end a war which was largely won, was the greatest display in foolish use of military might.
. You'd assume he'd just get on the radio but if it's an old Bellanca, there may be no battery power available, in a new Bellanca the fault that stopped the engine may also prevent the radio from working.
Please don't post unless you know what you're talking about.
ALL civilian aircraft save military, experimental, and balloons have ELTs which are powered off a separate, self-contained battery. The system can be manually triggered if it wasn't triggered by an impact.
The ELTs are monitored via satellite (they'll stop monitoring the older ones around 2010 or thereabouts), so remoteness is irrelevant for signal detection. The geography and clear air probably make it a lot *easier* to spot, not harder...provided he didn't crash into a steep canyon. A search plane flying at high altitude over any reasonable flight paths should be able to detect the signal easily.
Given the man's personal worth, I would expect that he very well had an EPIRB device or a modern ELT (the older ones aren't very good.) Hell, I'd be amazed if he didn't have a satphone as well.
illegal for automakers to sell these green cars
I read the blog that slashdot linked to. Aside from explaining that car manufacturers don't want to sell the more costly vehicles in non-"green" states, he doesn't explain anywhere HOW this is actually illegal; he just says the EPA Clean Air Act makes it illegal, without a single citation, quote of the Act, etc. Apparently Volvo wrote this letter saying "It's illegal!" and everyone else is believing them.
I have yet to find anything in the CAA that says "you can't sell a low-emissions vehicle outside California or Massachusetts" (or NY, which, incidentally, is NOT PART OF NEW ENGLAND...)
In fact, I found the following: