esp. considering the SUV would probably drive right over it if the SUV was coming from behind
No, an SUV would drive right over something like a Corvette. A Smart fortwo is way too tall (even awkwardly so) for that to happen. I've seen pickup trucks that are shorter!
The Smart gets more than 40mpg; the most efficient Toyotas (in the US) get up to 36 (manual Yaris according to fueleconomy.gov).
If you want a Toyota comparable to the Smart, you're looking at an Aygo, which is even smaller than a Yaris and not sold in the US.
By the way, about those Scions: although the first-gen xA and xB had the same 104hp, 1.5L engine as the Echo and Yaris, the new xB and xD will have larger ones and will probably get less mileage.
...everybody hating Krauts and all things German.
[and for the record, my ancestors were German, so I'm allowed to call myself a Kraut per the Geneva Convention]
Jeez, whatever! "Alaskan" Eskimos, "Canadian" Eskimos -- they're all the same anyway, since the distinction didn't exist before Europeans divided up the United States and Canada!
The point, which you thoroughly missed, was that the U.S. (and probably Canadian) government makes exceptions for natives. You can argue over which semantics are politically-correct until you're blue in the face; personally, I don't give a shit!
For another, killing the thief after the theft is done serves no other purpose than revenge.
RTFA. The loser was already on probation before she stole this woman's identity! If the previous victim had shot the loser, the subsequent theft would never have occurred.
"We" (as in "people subject to U.S. law") have stopped killing them. If you RTFA, you'll find that the people who killed the whale were Eskimos, who have permission to do it because it's their tradition.
If you want to bitch at the Eskimos for doing it, be my guest -- but you'll probably get bitched at in return about how "their traditions are as endangered as the whales" or some such thing.
First of all, it's "Portal" -- singular, not plural. Second, Valve hired all the developers of the prototype (called "Narbacular Drop"), so it's actually a first-party game.
Obviously you are against the government granting public easements and right-of-way to telcos too then, right?
If you want to abolish network neutrality and public easements, I'm all for it. Otherwise, all you're advocating is that the telcos be allowed to abuse the monopolies the government is granting them!
Why? Because these agreements don't protect the developers. In the long run, it won't do Linspire or whoever any good if they're legally allowed to sell Linux, but the community is dead.
This is how Microsoft "cuts off the air supply" of Free Software.
It doesn't matter who uses the technique first: if you acknowledge it as valid against them, then it's valid against you.
You seem to think the government and private citizens are somehow equal. They're not; in fact, they're exactly the opposite! Private citizens' freedom should be maximized, while the government's freedom (aka, power) should be minimized. One of the ways this is accomplished is that private citizens have an expectation of privacy while the government does not (or at least, should not).
However, if your argument is going to be "if they've got nothing to hide, they shouldn't mind", then you cannot complain when the police themselves turn that argument around on you.
WTF? Don't you realize there's a difference between an agent of the government acting in his official capacity and a normal private citizen?
After all, if you've got nothing to hide, why should you mind them videotaping you whenever you're acting as a public citizen (i.e. whenever you're in the public space, or rather whenever you're not in private space)?
There is no such thing as a "public citizen." There are only private citizens and agents of the government, and the two groups should be held to vastly different standards of conduct!
Unfortunately? Are you aware that the separation of powers between the federal and state goverments is designed to prevent tyranny (i.e., it's supposed to be a good thing)?
'Course, between the Civil War and the New Deal that idea was all blown to Hell, but I digress...
I think you're slightly mistaken there. In my transportation engineering class, we were recently taught that the posted speed limit is about 85% of the design speed of the highway (rounded to the nearest 5mph). The design speed is presumably the maximum "safe" speed, although I'm not sure how it's determined. I imagine it's based on some kind of lowest-common-denominator, like a half-blind old lady driving a huge Buick with drum brakes, or a semi, or something. One thing I can tell you it's not though, is that it's not based on a survey of existing traffic speeds -- you have to design the road before the traffic exists! And also it's not so much that "15% percent of people" should be speeding, it's that it should be safe for [100% of] people to go 15% faster than the posted limit.
The question is not "why should the software be less patentable than the hardware?" but rather, "why should the hardware be more patentable than the software?" They're both just implementations of a mathematical algorithm; neither should be patentable!
How much more of this bullshit should we be expected to take before we really become the pirates and terrorists they think we are and simply blow up the CableCARD company's headquarters (along with that of Microsoft, the RIAA, etc)? I'm seriously beginning to think nothing less will solve the problem!
No, that doesn't mean it's worth dealing with this DRM bullshit for; it just means it's worth downloading of BitTorrent (which is a hell of a lot easier)!
Slashdot Mirror
No, an SUV would drive right over something like a Corvette. A Smart fortwo is way too tall (even awkwardly so) for that to happen. I've seen pickup trucks that are shorter!
The Smart gets more than 40mpg; the most efficient Toyotas (in the US) get up to 36 (manual Yaris according to fueleconomy.gov).
If you want a Toyota comparable to the Smart, you're looking at an Aygo, which is even smaller than a Yaris and not sold in the US.
By the way, about those Scions: although the first-gen xA and xB had the same 104hp, 1.5L engine as the Echo and Yaris, the new xB and xD will have larger ones and will probably get less mileage.
Not only that, but it's pretty easy to find keyboards at Fry's or Microcenter for $5 or less retail.
No need to be sauer about it!
Jeez, whatever! "Alaskan" Eskimos, "Canadian" Eskimos -- they're all the same anyway, since the distinction didn't exist before Europeans divided up the United States and Canada!
The point, which you thoroughly missed, was that the U.S. (and probably Canadian) government makes exceptions for natives. You can argue over which semantics are politically-correct until you're blue in the face; personally, I don't give a shit!
RTFA. The loser was already on probation before she stole this woman's identity! If the previous victim had shot the loser, the subsequent theft would never have occurred.
They made the choice to die when they decided to take stuff that wasn't theirs!
Nah, that's nothing compared to this!
"We" (as in "people subject to U.S. law") have stopped killing them. If you RTFA, you'll find that the people who killed the whale were Eskimos, who have permission to do it because it's their tradition.
If you want to bitch at the Eskimos for doing it, be my guest -- but you'll probably get bitched at in return about how "their traditions are as endangered as the whales" or some such thing.
First of all, it's "Portal" -- singular, not plural. Second, Valve hired all the developers of the prototype (called "Narbacular Drop"), so it's actually a first-party game.
Nothing recently, but Nintendo was absolutely notorious back in the NES/SNES days for censorship (e.g. Mortal Kombat), price-fixing, etc.
Engineers don't get EMPs anymore?! : (
Obviously you are against the government granting public easements and right-of-way to telcos too then, right?
If you want to abolish network neutrality and public easements, I'm all for it. Otherwise, all you're advocating is that the telcos be allowed to abuse the monopolies the government is granting them!
I agree completely. Also, consider this: if she had carried a gun, she could have saved herself a 45-minute chase.
Why? Because these agreements don't protect the developers. In the long run, it won't do Linspire or whoever any good if they're legally allowed to sell Linux, but the community is dead.
This is how Microsoft "cuts off the air supply" of Free Software.
Off-duty, that's true. However, when cops are on-duty, they most certainly do lose any expectation of privacy! Public scrutiny is part of the job.
You seem to think the government and private citizens are somehow equal. They're not; in fact, they're exactly the opposite! Private citizens' freedom should be maximized, while the government's freedom (aka, power) should be minimized. One of the ways this is accomplished is that private citizens have an expectation of privacy while the government does not (or at least, should not).
WTF? Don't you realize there's a difference between an agent of the government acting in his official capacity and a normal private citizen?
There is no such thing as a "public citizen." There are only private citizens and agents of the government, and the two groups should be held to vastly different standards of conduct!
Unfortunately? Are you aware that the separation of powers between the federal and state goverments is designed to prevent tyranny (i.e., it's supposed to be a good thing)?
'Course, between the Civil War and the New Deal that idea was all blown to Hell, but I digress...
I think you're slightly mistaken there. In my transportation engineering class, we were recently taught that the posted speed limit is about 85% of the design speed of the highway (rounded to the nearest 5mph). The design speed is presumably the maximum "safe" speed, although I'm not sure how it's determined. I imagine it's based on some kind of lowest-common-denominator, like a half-blind old lady driving a huge Buick with drum brakes, or a semi, or something. One thing I can tell you it's not though, is that it's not based on a survey of existing traffic speeds -- you have to design the road before the traffic exists! And also it's not so much that "15% percent of people" should be speeding, it's that it should be safe for [100% of] people to go 15% faster than the posted limit.
Studies for a bit...
Nope, software is still just math, so it's not patentable. And it's already covered by copyright, so it's doubly not patentable!
What more evidence do you need?
The question is not "why should the software be less patentable than the hardware?" but rather, "why should the hardware be more patentable than the software?" They're both just implementations of a mathematical algorithm; neither should be patentable!
How much more of this bullshit should we be expected to take before we really become the pirates and terrorists they think we are and simply blow up the CableCARD company's headquarters (along with that of Microsoft, the RIAA, etc)? I'm seriously beginning to think nothing less will solve the problem!
...yet.
No, that doesn't mean it's worth dealing with this DRM bullshit for; it just means it's worth downloading of BitTorrent (which is a hell of a lot easier)!