Actually America puts its own screening points in foreign airports for flights bound for the US. I'm not fully certain if they had this for the flight with the underwear bomber, though.
Also, while this is the case, it's usually just an additional passport check.
No, for everything to be totally screwed, the full key held at the two secure facilities in the US would have to be lost or destroyed plus the keys held by three of the "key-holders" would have to be lost or destroyed as well.
I was thinking something similar to the way RAID6 is implemented, where you have five blocks of data plus two parity blocks so that any two block devices can be missing and all the data can still be reconstructed. This could easily be adapted on a smaller scale to work with key-sharing.
In the first case you've gone from 10 to 20 mpg which means that you've gone from using 10 gallons to 5 gallons per 100 miles, saving you 5 gallons. In the second case You've gone from 33 to 50 mpg, which means you've gone from using 3 gallons to 2 gallons per 100 miles saving you only 1 gallon. That said, as much as people will get this question wrong, the important thing to know is that the 50mpg car is the best for fuel efficiency overall and hardly anyone would get that wrong.
Yes, but they actually did get the jackpot, just not in the amount that they had thought they won, so the casino did the right thing, imo, considering they could have stuck by the legal wording on the machine and just returned the bet amount.
If the Colorado Gaming Division says the machine is defective, the couple should sue them for allowing it into service.
Actually, the certification is done by a third party, so the couple should sue the casino and the certifier, and the CGD only if it doesn't revoke the certifying agency's license to certify in their state.
The malfunction is going to be something along the lines of a RAM error, where a hardware component failed and caused the issue. This is not something that would or could have been picked up in a certification because the component would have been working just fine then. All the certifier can do is say that the machine is working properly "now", it says nothing of how the machine will operate tomorrow or the next day, and these machines run 24/7/365 for years. The fact that they hold up as well as they do under those conditions shows that they are well engineered to begin with.
After having translated software from its source code form into
executable format, the program quite often needs to be installed into
the system. The process of installation is often automatized by
installation scripts. Exactly those scripts are referred to by the
GPL.
Please note that this is of special practical importance in the case of
embedded devices, since the executable program(s) need to be somehow
installed onto the device. If the user is not given a way to install
his own (modified) versions of the program, he has no way of exercising
his freedom to run modified versions of the program.
Sometimes, the process of installation is not facilitated by scripts, but
by some other means (such as executable programs). The GPL text only
mentions the word "scripts". But when reading and interpreting the license,
it is clearly understood that the license doesn't specifically only mean
"scripts", but any kind of software programs that are required to install
a (modified) version of the compiled program.
Honest question: does distribution internal to an organization count as distribution as described by the GPL? That is, if I have code subject to the GPL, and I distribute it to my employees without allowing them access to the source code, am I violating the GPL?
From this article SONY sold 23.8 million consoles by June 30, 2009, I'll give a conservative estimate of another 1.2 million consoles sold by the end of the class inclusion date (end of March, I think), so 25 million consoles sales can be included in the class (I think it's a bit more but I'm being conservative here).multiply by the purchase price of $599 (we'll say $600) and you get 15 billion dollars in damages (yess that's billion with a "B".
From what I understand, fraud is alleged in the complaint as well. SONY originally advertised the Other OS feature and many people purchased a PS3 over a lower priced xbox 360 or wii because of the reasonable expectation that Other OS would continue to be available for the life of the console. This initial representation and advertisement of the Other OS feature was false and therefore a fraudulent means of selling additional consoles. From what I understand fraud is in many circumstances punishable by treble damages, so we'll triple the 15 billion in damages and SONY could end up compensating consumers for a whopping 45 BILLION dollars!
an NDA is not unconscionable because it is an exchange. In exchange for not disclosing certain information you are given the right to see trade secrets, or to hold employment (and to see trade secrets), or some other right. So while it is taking away one right it is giving you something else in return. What SONY is attempting to do is contractually remove features from the PS3 without any form of compensation at all. That is an unconscionable contract.
They're just using this as a legal reason not to release their customer records. If you could cite a constitutional amendment to get out of a tax audit wouldn't you?
Simple solution: don't use filenames with spaces in them. They're an incredibly stupid idea. If you need something that looks like a space, use an underscore.
That's easy enough to say until you get a zip file from your relatives with all the pics from their vacation complete with lots of descriptive filenames with spaces in them. You don't always have control over the names of your files and it's often times a lot easier to just learn to deal with filenames with spaces in them than to go and rename a large batch of files that you get.
A 10MB drive is almost certainly going to be MFM, early RLL drives were 30 or 60 MB at least (although it was possible at the time to reformat an MFM drive to RLL and get some additional capacity but you wouldn't have ended up with 10MB). At any rate you're biggest problem with moving the drive to the new system will be finding an MFM controller that fits into the motherboard on a modern system. MFM controllers used either an 8 or 16 bit ISA bus which modern motherboards no longer have expansion slots for (modern boards have PCI slots). If you're very lucky you may have a motherboard that's old enough to still have one or two ISA slots on it. Also, if the current system has an 8 bit controller then it may have a block of proprietary drive info written down on the first track of the drive and will need to use the same controller to get the data off. These controllers did this because they pre-dated battery backed CMOS to store the drive parameters on. If it's a 16 bit controller (has an extended extra bit of slot on the end) then it will likely have stored the drive parameters in the CMOS and you'll be alright with any 16 bit controller (again, as long as you can find a slot to plug it into).
They'll probably be asking specific questions, such as, "can we get a copy of your log entries so we can match the IPs and times to our own logs and see why this is happening?"
To address this, we put some mod_rewrite stuff in on each site that either explicitly makes sure the www. is there or explicitly removes it, with a redirect.
That's actually what I usually do, except I use RedirectPermanent instead of mod_rewrite. I was just not being that specific in my post above.
The downside to that approach is it can cause issues with referrer statistics. The way to deal with that is, of course, to configure your statistic gathering software (such as awstats) to recognize that both the domains are for the same website.
Slashdot Mirror
Nah, he'll just have to walk out his front door and violate his house arrest.
Actually America puts its own screening points in foreign airports for flights bound for the US. I'm not fully certain if they had this for the flight with the underwear bomber, though.
Also, while this is the case, it's usually just an additional passport check.
They have 512MB SSDs that are 2.5" form factor
Really? I would think it would be more like 512GB ... or more (especially considering the 16GB USB flash memory stick I have)
No, for everything to be totally screwed, the full key held at the two secure facilities in the US would have to be lost or destroyed plus the keys held by three of the "key-holders" would have to be lost or destroyed as well.
I was thinking something similar to the way RAID6 is implemented, where you have five blocks of data plus two parity blocks so that any two block devices can be missing and all the data can still be reconstructed. This could easily be adapted on a smaller scale to work with key-sharing.
math: FAIL
In the first case you've gone from 10 to 20 mpg which means that you've gone from using 10 gallons to 5 gallons per 100 miles, saving you 5 gallons. In the second case You've gone from 33 to 50 mpg, which means you've gone from using 3 gallons to 2 gallons per 100 miles saving you only 1 gallon. That said, as much as people will get this question wrong, the important thing to know is that the 50mpg car is the best for fuel efficiency overall and hardly anyone would get that wrong.
Yes, but they actually did get the jackpot, just not in the amount that they had thought they won, so the casino did the right thing, imo, considering they could have stuck by the legal wording on the machine and just returned the bet amount.
If the Colorado Gaming Division says the machine is defective, the couple should sue them for allowing it into service.
Actually, the certification is done by a third party, so the couple should sue the casino and the certifier, and the CGD only if it doesn't revoke the certifying agency's license to certify in their state.
The malfunction is going to be something along the lines of a RAM error, where a hardware component failed and caused the issue. This is not something that would or could have been picked up in a certification because the component would have been working just fine then. All the certifier can do is say that the machine is working properly "now", it says nothing of how the machine will operate tomorrow or the next day, and these machines run 24/7/365 for years. The fact that they hold up as well as they do under those conditions shows that they are well engineered to begin with.
Those would actually qualify as install scripts, see GPL Violations Source Code Release FAQ, specifically this section:
What are "scripts used to control installation"?
After having translated software from its source code form into
executable format, the program quite often needs to be installed into
the system. The process of installation is often automatized by
installation scripts. Exactly those scripts are referred to by the
GPL.
Please note that this is of special practical importance in the case of
embedded devices, since the executable program(s) need to be somehow
installed onto the device. If the user is not given a way to install
his own (modified) versions of the program, he has no way of exercising
his freedom to run modified versions of the program.
Sometimes, the process of installation is not facilitated by scripts, but
by some other means (such as executable programs). The GPL text only
mentions the word "scripts". But when reading and interpreting the license,
it is clearly understood that the license doesn't specifically only mean
"scripts", but any kind of software programs that are required to install
a (modified) version of the compiled program.
Honest question: does distribution internal to an organization count as distribution as described by the GPL? That is, if I have code subject to the GPL, and I distribute it to my employees without allowing them access to the source code, am I violating the GPL?
Honest answer: No.
At least I still got my buffalo wings.
Errrrrr, hate to break this to you ...
Sounds like Microsoft's way of writing code. Since the OP is writing a library for .NET it should work fine.
From this article SONY sold 23.8 million consoles by June 30, 2009, I'll give a conservative estimate of another 1.2 million consoles sold by the end of the class inclusion date (end of March, I think), so 25 million consoles sales can be included in the class (I think it's a bit more but I'm being conservative here).multiply by the purchase price of $599 (we'll say $600) and you get 15 billion dollars in damages (yess that's billion with a "B".
From what I understand, fraud is alleged in the complaint as well. SONY originally advertised the Other OS feature and many people purchased a PS3 over a lower priced xbox 360 or wii because of the reasonable expectation that Other OS would continue to be available for the life of the console. This initial representation and advertisement of the Other OS feature was false and therefore a fraudulent means of selling additional consoles. From what I understand fraud is in many circumstances punishable by treble damages, so we'll triple the 15 billion in damages and SONY could end up compensating consumers for a whopping 45 BILLION dollars!
an NDA is not unconscionable because it is an exchange. In exchange for not disclosing certain information you are given the right to see trade secrets, or to hold employment (and to see trade secrets), or some other right. So while it is taking away one right it is giving you something else in return. What SONY is attempting to do is contractually remove features from the PS3 without any form of compensation at all. That is an unconscionable contract.
Yeah, I suppose, but I still feel that this is really just an excuse to keep the govt out of their books than anything else.
They're just using this as a legal reason not to release their customer records. If you could cite a constitutional amendment to get out of a tax audit wouldn't you?
Simple solution: don't use filenames with spaces in them. They're an incredibly stupid idea. If you need something that looks like a space, use an underscore.
That's easy enough to say until you get a zip file from your relatives with all the pics from their vacation complete with lots of descriptive filenames with spaces in them. You don't always have control over the names of your files and it's often times a lot easier to just learn to deal with filenames with spaces in them than to go and rename a large batch of files that you get.
tar tf file.tar | xargs -d '\n' rm
In a way, it's a lot like the "Free software" debate. Most people don't give a crap if their software is "Free" or not,
Nope, but they're more than willing to use that cracked copy of MS Office their nephew installed for them.
A 10MB drive is almost certainly going to be MFM, early RLL drives were 30 or 60 MB at least (although it was possible at the time to reformat an MFM drive to RLL and get some additional capacity but you wouldn't have ended up with 10MB). At any rate you're biggest problem with moving the drive to the new system will be finding an MFM controller that fits into the motherboard on a modern system. MFM controllers used either an 8 or 16 bit ISA bus which modern motherboards no longer have expansion slots for (modern boards have PCI slots). If you're very lucky you may have a motherboard that's old enough to still have one or two ISA slots on it. Also, if the current system has an 8 bit controller then it may have a block of proprietary drive info written down on the first track of the drive and will need to use the same controller to get the data off. These controllers did this because they pre-dated battery backed CMOS to store the drive parameters on. If it's a 16 bit controller (has an extended extra bit of slot on the end) then it will likely have stored the drive parameters in the CMOS and you'll be alright with any 16 bit controller (again, as long as you can find a slot to plug it into).
Good luck
Actually the writing implies that a Windows solution will take four racks of 48 servers each or 192 servers.
They'll probably be asking specific questions, such as, "can we get a copy of your log entries so we can match the IPs and times to our own logs and see why this is happening?"
You'd be amazed how many people still can't get it right even if you write it down for them.
But for the record, Slashdot doesn't handle www.apple.slashdot.org either.
Yes, but I highly doubt your boss reads slashdot, and www.slashdot.org does redirect to slashdot.org.
To address this, we put some mod_rewrite stuff in on each site that either explicitly makes sure the www. is there or explicitly removes it, with a redirect.
That's actually what I usually do, except I use RedirectPermanent instead of mod_rewrite. I was just not being that specific in my post above.
The downside to that approach is it can cause issues with referrer statistics. The way to deal with that is, of course, to configure your statistic gathering software (such as awstats) to recognize that both the domains are for the same website.