Every time the media has reported on something I knew about personally, I was always shocked at the number and magnitude of factual errors they made, the twisting of focus away from the main issue.
I agree 110%. The stories I've seen broadcast about events I had personal knowledge of made it so I trust the media story about as much as I'd trust a junkie with the safekeeping of a kilo of heroin.
I was mostly responding to the theory that if someone screws up once in a (seemingly) minor way they are untrustworthy to do anything ever again. Hell, even if they screw up in a major way (assuming something short of gross negligence). If that was the case, there would be almost nobody employed anywhere. The story was taken at face value simply for the sake of argument. It's unlikely that a single person here actually knows the real story to any major degree, so discussion is pretty meaningless without taking it at face value. It all ends up being theory and conjecture anyway.
If the CISO treats one rule casually, what is the dolt liable to ignore next?
This is probably one of the most specious arguments anyone ever trots out about someone breaking (or overlooking) a rule, especially in organizations known for coming up with rules for every single thought or action one engages in (e.g. a bureaucracy). Unless the incident was actually ongoing, or had the potential to risk the security or integrity of the systems it was his job to oversee, talking about a past incident germane to the topic of the conference is what people do at conferences. That's the entire point. Yes, he violated a minor rule. "Oh lordy lordy, who will he kill next?" is not really the best response to the situation.
Since T-Mobile changed their rate plans, I managed to upgrade two lines to unlimited data/Blackberry email for only an additional $10/month (and no contract extension to boot). And yeah, they don't give a damn if it's tethered to something or not. I think this is the exception to "you get what you pay for," unless people really are intending to pay that much to be screwed.
What I love about this is the number of posts in previous threads over the last few months claiming that this was a nontrivial DRM, that it wouldn't be broken for weeks.
People (at least those with more than two brain cells) were arguing that this was potentially non-trivial DRM, not that it absolutely was non-trivial.
Can we finally set to rest the notion that there is such a thing as non-trivial to crack DRM?
No, because it's not true. If you think it is, go log into your cracked copy of WoW or Eve Online and get back to me.
A corporation is a legal entity, not an assembly of people. It is a creation of the state to transfer liability from people to an artificial person. It is required to operate in a manner specified by the state. A corporation can, in fact, exist apart from anyone else, though it would be largely irrelevant to do so.
A corporation can be forcibly dissolved. Can you really say that an entity that owes its very existence to the state somehow has implicit rights?
Xfinity = the amount of time you'll spend dialing because the hold system disconnects you every time you make it through the Customer Service menu.
Re:behavioral problems have virtually disappeared
on
The Wi-Fi On the Bus
·
· Score: 1
There are a lot of parallels in this to my own story.
I would add to it the following:
Find at least one physical activity that you truly enjoy will do wonders for your self-confidence. Find a local martial arts instructor, join an extra-curricular weight-lifting program at your high school, take up rollerblading. It doesn't have to dominate your life, but being well-rounded includes physical as well as intellectual pursuits. You will feel better about yourself, and vitamin D deficiency (lack of sunlight exposure) contributes greatly to depression.
Take the initiative to do something and change your circumstances.
Being intellectual and having a lack of social skills do not necessarily go hand-in-hand, but once you develop those patterns it becomes very hard to break them in your adult life.
I've thought a lot about the cause of that, and I've concluded that, for me at least it's: what if I do something stupid? They're all going to laugh at me. I couldn't handle it.
But the truth is: they're not going to laugh at you.
This, right here. Actually, sometimes they will laugh at you. The trick is to not withdraw or attack if people laugh. As long as your reaction is not one of those two things, you'll be fine and people will think you the better for it (whether they say so or not).
Quite easily. There is no requirement for public debate or notice in passing legislation or signing treaties. It is assumed that people will vote out politicians who do such things. The fact that there are enough of them currently elected that this is even a possibility shows that US citizens get exactly the government they want and deserve. Otherwise, we wouldn't have as many slimy people in office.
Actually, the question above is exactly why this is a problem: US citizens have no idea how their government works in practice, let alone how it should work in theory.
Most people being from out of the city/state wouldn't change that the only people in NYC who have guns are criminals and cops. Non-criminals coming into the state have to be oblivious to the point of criminal stupidity to bring a firearm into the city given the penalties for being caught in possession of one.
Credit card companies may not be trustworthy either, but there is a large difference between what PayPal can get away with and what credit card companies can get away with. It's far easier to protect yourself from adverse action by a credit card company than it is to protect yourself from PayPal freezing your account or draining your attached bank account and/or credit cards.
Online bank payments aren't necessarily any better: the benefits and risks are simply different. The one major drawback there is that there is no authorization list for ACH transactions, nor can specific entities be easily blacklisted from making ACH requests on a given account. Anyone who gets the account and routing number can attempt to drain your bank account, and unless there is activity that registers on a given bank's list of things that raise red flags they'll happily send the money on its way. You can only respond after it's happened, and it can be a lot harder to reverse than a fraudulent credit card transaction.
He's not correct though. A corporation can have "personhood" revoked by being dissolved by the jurisdiction it was incorporated in, thus removing all ability to exercise rights. "Personhood" can also be revoked or changed judicially. Both of these things clearly indicate that the corporation has no rights, only privileges. They exist at the pleasure of the legislature of the state they are incorporated in. Real people do not exist in such a manner, and cannot have their rights revoked in the same way (unless, apparently, they are declared an "enemy combatant").
A corporation is not chartered on the basis of the right of free association. If it were, people could be hired and fired at any time, for any (or no) reason, without repercussions (aside from times when there is a contract controlling the situation). It is a legal fiction designed to limit the liability of those operating under the corporate umbrella, in exchange for allowing dictation by the State of how they function. If a controlling jurisdiction says "You can't do that," a corporation should not be able to do whatever "that" is. Don't like it? Form a partnership or sole proprietorship. No limitation of liability, no dictation by the State of what you can and can't do (aside from ordinary commercial regulation).
Well, specifically in regards to the military, this is not true. Since you cannot, generally, sue the US government because of sovereign immunity, they don't care about insurance to cover failure. All those components they buy, with few exceptions, don't come with additional guarantees unavailable through standard retail or wholesale channels. The price is because of vendor contract lock-in in this case.
Pops up the latitude and longitude in the search field, but displays things that don't display if you search by lat/long specifically.
It shows photos and videos linked to locations, user-created maps that correspond to the area displayed, and a link to explore the area. For the most part it's stuff that's not very useful, as far as I can tell.
This thread is also the first time I've heard mention of right-click functions on Google maps. Zoom in, out, and recenter are all redundant because they're accomplished more easily other ways. For directions, I already know the start and end points, so using the map would take longer than simply typing them in.
The only function that's not easier or more intuitive to use some other way is the "What's here?" link. Then again, it's pretty much just a curiosity if I were randomly browsing a location on a map.
Guess there's a reason I never missed any of those functions, and will continue to not miss them.
Adding "Let's sell with it!" isn't a novel addition to anything. It's a basic underlying assumption of any patent, so shouldn't be considered a part of the patent as a whole.
I guess that means I can patent the use of two cans and a piece of string as a broadcast method, because nobody has monetized that before.
Considering that it's a brand-new product, the fact that it's already been successfully produced with 40% transparency means it's likely going to be improved significantly through further development. I fully expect the technology, or one very like it, to eventually see use in car windshields.
Oh, I'm not disagreeing that the attempt to monetize it is something new. We're talking about a patent though. There's supposed to be something novel and original about it, not just "It's different because now I'm going to sell it!" This is the US though, so I'm not surprised.
Americans have a very low functional literacy rate. The problem is endemic, and is unlikely to go away as people care less about accuracy and more about expediency.
That was just a convenient article for illustration, but the material exists to thoroughly bury the point in a mountain of supporting evidence.
For one, Cat has also opened a primary R&D facility in China to do engine testing and create advanced materials, electronics, and fabrication processes. The Chinese will have access to everything they need to copy the quality, if they so choose.
Slashdot Mirror
I agree 110%. The stories I've seen broadcast about events I had personal knowledge of made it so I trust the media story about as much as I'd trust a junkie with the safekeeping of a kilo of heroin.
I was mostly responding to the theory that if someone screws up once in a (seemingly) minor way they are untrustworthy to do anything ever again. Hell, even if they screw up in a major way (assuming something short of gross negligence). If that was the case, there would be almost nobody employed anywhere. The story was taken at face value simply for the sake of argument. It's unlikely that a single person here actually knows the real story to any major degree, so discussion is pretty meaningless without taking it at face value. It all ends up being theory and conjecture anyway.
This is probably one of the most specious arguments anyone ever trots out about someone breaking (or overlooking) a rule, especially in organizations known for coming up with rules for every single thought or action one engages in (e.g. a bureaucracy). Unless the incident was actually ongoing, or had the potential to risk the security or integrity of the systems it was his job to oversee, talking about a past incident germane to the topic of the conference is what people do at conferences. That's the entire point. Yes, he violated a minor rule. "Oh lordy lordy, who will he kill next?" is not really the best response to the situation.
Since T-Mobile changed their rate plans, I managed to upgrade two lines to unlimited data/Blackberry email for only an additional $10/month (and no contract extension to boot). And yeah, they don't give a damn if it's tethered to something or not. I think this is the exception to "you get what you pay for," unless people really are intending to pay that much to be screwed.
People (at least those with more than two brain cells) were arguing that this was potentially non-trivial DRM, not that it absolutely was non-trivial.
No, because it's not true. If you think it is, go log into your cracked copy of WoW or Eve Online and get back to me.
A corporation is a legal entity, not an assembly of people. It is a creation of the state to transfer liability from people to an artificial person. It is required to operate in a manner specified by the state. A corporation can, in fact, exist apart from anyone else, though it would be largely irrelevant to do so.
A corporation can be forcibly dissolved. Can you really say that an entity that owes its very existence to the state somehow has implicit rights?
I've installed Drupal on a Dreamhost shared server. I don't recall it being any different from installing any other software package.
Xfinity = the amount of time you'll spend dialing because the hold system disconnects you every time you make it through the Customer Service menu.
There are a lot of parallels in this to my own story.
I would add to it the following:
Find at least one physical activity that you truly enjoy will do wonders for your self-confidence. Find a local martial arts instructor, join an extra-curricular weight-lifting program at your high school, take up rollerblading. It doesn't have to dominate your life, but being well-rounded includes physical as well as intellectual pursuits. You will feel better about yourself, and vitamin D deficiency (lack of sunlight exposure) contributes greatly to depression.
Take the initiative to do something and change your circumstances.
Being intellectual and having a lack of social skills do not necessarily go hand-in-hand, but once you develop those patterns it becomes very hard to break them in your adult life.
This, right here. Actually, sometimes they will laugh at you. The trick is to not withdraw or attack if people laugh. As long as your reaction is not one of those two things, you'll be fine and people will think you the better for it (whether they say so or not).
Brilliant example of why any other major OEM is obviously fine if MS stops selling to them. I applaud your well-reasoned rebuttal.
Quite easily. There is no requirement for public debate or notice in passing legislation or signing treaties. It is assumed that people will vote out politicians who do such things. The fact that there are enough of them currently elected that this is even a possibility shows that US citizens get exactly the government they want and deserve. Otherwise, we wouldn't have as many slimy people in office.
Actually, the question above is exactly why this is a problem: US citizens have no idea how their government works in practice, let alone how it should work in theory.
Most people being from out of the city/state wouldn't change that the only people in NYC who have guns are criminals and cops. Non-criminals coming into the state have to be oblivious to the point of criminal stupidity to bring a firearm into the city given the penalties for being caught in possession of one.
Credit card companies may not be trustworthy either, but there is a large difference between what PayPal can get away with and what credit card companies can get away with. It's far easier to protect yourself from adverse action by a credit card company than it is to protect yourself from PayPal freezing your account or draining your attached bank account and/or credit cards.
Online bank payments aren't necessarily any better: the benefits and risks are simply different. The one major drawback there is that there is no authorization list for ACH transactions, nor can specific entities be easily blacklisted from making ACH requests on a given account. Anyone who gets the account and routing number can attempt to drain your bank account, and unless there is activity that registers on a given bank's list of things that raise red flags they'll happily send the money on its way. You can only respond after it's happened, and it can be a lot harder to reverse than a fraudulent credit card transaction.
No. I want the benefits of them starting Google, plus more benefits from them starting Google.
Fixed.
He's not correct though. A corporation can have "personhood" revoked by being dissolved by the jurisdiction it was incorporated in, thus removing all ability to exercise rights. "Personhood" can also be revoked or changed judicially. Both of these things clearly indicate that the corporation has no rights, only privileges. They exist at the pleasure of the legislature of the state they are incorporated in. Real people do not exist in such a manner, and cannot have their rights revoked in the same way (unless, apparently, they are declared an "enemy combatant").
A corporation is not chartered on the basis of the right of free association. If it were, people could be hired and fired at any time, for any (or no) reason, without repercussions (aside from times when there is a contract controlling the situation). It is a legal fiction designed to limit the liability of those operating under the corporate umbrella, in exchange for allowing dictation by the State of how they function. If a controlling jurisdiction says "You can't do that," a corporation should not be able to do whatever "that" is. Don't like it? Form a partnership or sole proprietorship. No limitation of liability, no dictation by the State of what you can and can't do (aside from ordinary commercial regulation).
I took it as referencing the "Offtopic" mod to your comment rather than anything the GP said, albeit a bit unclearly. I could be wrong though.
Well, specifically in regards to the military, this is not true. Since you cannot, generally, sue the US government because of sovereign immunity, they don't care about insurance to cover failure. All those components they buy, with few exceptions, don't come with additional guarantees unavailable through standard retail or wholesale channels. The price is because of vendor contract lock-in in this case.
No, less useful.
Pops up the latitude and longitude in the search field, but displays things that don't display if you search by lat/long specifically.
It shows photos and videos linked to locations, user-created maps that correspond to the area displayed, and a link to explore the area. For the most part it's stuff that's not very useful, as far as I can tell.
This thread is also the first time I've heard mention of right-click functions on Google maps. Zoom in, out, and recenter are all redundant because they're accomplished more easily other ways. For directions, I already know the start and end points, so using the map would take longer than simply typing them in.
The only function that's not easier or more intuitive to use some other way is the "What's here?" link. Then again, it's pretty much just a curiosity if I were randomly browsing a location on a map.
Guess there's a reason I never missed any of those functions, and will continue to not miss them.
Adding "Let's sell with it!" isn't a novel addition to anything. It's a basic underlying assumption of any patent, so shouldn't be considered a part of the patent as a whole.
I guess that means I can patent the use of two cans and a piece of string as a broadcast method, because nobody has monetized that before.
Considering that it's a brand-new product, the fact that it's already been successfully produced with 40% transparency means it's likely going to be improved significantly through further development. I fully expect the technology, or one very like it, to eventually see use in car windshields.
Oh, I'm not disagreeing that the attempt to monetize it is something new. We're talking about a patent though. There's supposed to be something novel and original about it, not just "It's different because now I'm going to sell it!" This is the US though, so I'm not surprised.
Using multiple keys to unlock different content from the same encrypted file is nothing new.
Americans have a very low functional literacy rate. The problem is endemic, and is unlikely to go away as people care less about accuracy and more about expediency.
That was just a convenient article for illustration, but the material exists to thoroughly bury the point in a mountain of supporting evidence.
For one, Cat has also opened a primary R&D facility in China to do engine testing and create advanced materials, electronics, and fabrication processes. The Chinese will have access to everything they need to copy the quality, if they so choose.
Caterpillar
Wrong.