Therefore, many of the interpretations that have arisen, such as the confidentiality of sources, is not based on sound Constitutional interpretation since this doctrine is applied only to bona fide "journalists" and established news sources.
Freedom also means the freedom to take the consequences. Nowhere in the literal words of the constitution is there written that you have an expectation of confidentiality when you speak. Granting additional freedoms to a class of people - in this case, journalists - may be problematic, but you could remove those freedoms and still be well within constitutional restrictions.
Not that I think that they should be removed - just because something's not constitutionally guaranteed doesn't mean its a bad thing - but its not a requirement.
All you need is for one person with a larger sales/marketing budget than you to have that line of thinking, and you're basically out of business. That's the real problem - for the inventor to succeed without protection requires everyone to be nice - the first bad apple spoils the bunch. Which is why we have what were supposed to be limited patent/copyright protections, which work quite well - its when they become effectively unlimited that their problems really come to the fore.
Very interesting. Even that chart is misleading though - its looking purely at "revenue" (income received) which ignores the fact that distribution costs are vastly higher on physical media sales, even if pre-production costs are identical. Before you had a case where the single and the album cost basicallly the same amount to make, but the album was vastly more popular and more expensive to buy (hence more profitable). Now you have a case where the digital and physical instances are priced similarly, but the digital ones are vastly cheaper to create/distribute (hence more profitable). Any graph that doesn't take that into account is still missing a lot of the picture.
The thing is, there really is no wolf. At least, not comparitively. More people die and are injured installing solar panels on roofs (a relatively rare form of power generation) than have ever been affected by nuclear disasters. But people falling off of roofs is normal and doesn't make headlines. Same with coal - mining is incredibly dangerous, both individually and geologically, but we're used to it. Nuclear power is (as power generation goes) still by far the safest option out there.
Buying no tickets costs $0 and gains you nothing, and you have absolutely no chance of winning. Buying one ticket costs $1 and gains you a pleasant few minutes of fantasy. Might be worth it, might not. It also gives you a real (yet tiny) chance of winning. Buying ten tickets costs $10 and gains you the same fantasy, but at 10X the price. You still have only a tiny chance of winning.
Bottom line - buy no tickets, or one ticket, but never more than one. There's no gain.
As a general real-world rule of thumb, a convenience item that would cost you $10 in a large US city will cost you £10 in a British one. Its about buying power, not nominal currency exchange rates.
Make it large enough to handle textbook content presented at a readable size (typically letter-sized pages), and I'd be all over it, as long as it allowed me to upload my own pdf's to it, and, perhaps no less important, as long as it wasn't priced ridiculously high. And yeah, I know there's some e-ink readers oout there with displays nearly that big, but the current state of affairs with eink displays totally blows. Page refreshes are so slow that I'd rather carry 20 lbs worth of textbooks than try to use an eink reader for anything other than the reading of fiction.
Actually, full letter size is generally far too large. Take a standrd hardback book, then pare down the margin space you no longer need (and which is to be replaced by screen bezel, not empty pixels), and you've got a very well established field-tested form factor to work with.
There's nothing I put out there, on a blog, comment Facebook, or even (especially) Twitter, that I'd consider to be private information. The stuff I had to reveal to get approved for my mortgage, however, that was private information. See the difference?
We have more screen space and screen resolution than ever before
Screen resolutions are pretty much the same as they were 5 years (well even more than that) ago. 22" is still 1680x1050, 24" is still 1920x1200, 30" 2560x1600, etc...
However, more people than before have large, cheap monitors. Reasonable 27" screens can be purchased for a few hundred dollars, great ones for less than a thousand. That's new. That's then causing more people to have higher resolutions than they did 5 years ago.
Releases should be irrelevant for a stable product
iOS anyone? Even when it comes to ubiquitous personal devices like phones, there are always reasons to know what version you're running. Sometimes it's just marketing, sometimes you need to know your old iPhone won't run the latest iOS, so it's time to upgrade. Or not.. sometimes it's about choice. Information is good.
Hence the useful differences between major versions (iOS 4 vs iOS 5) and minor versions (do you even remember what the last point release of iOS 4 was?) - a difference that Firefox has blurred to the point of unusability. Were there really 5 major, product-changing releases between the last point release of FF3 and the current release of FF8?
And everybody's plugins complaining. And the Mozilla product nagging you to upgrade. But apart from that, no, its not obvious at all.
If its a minor upgrade, it should just happen (based on enterprise-settings). If its a major upgrade, it should be there when I, the user, want to make the change. The trouble is that we used to differentiate between those with major and minor version numbers. Firefox no longer has that differentiation, and no longer internally understands the differences.
And for what its worth, full expensive compliance certification is rare as well. Last time I checked, the threshold for needing level one compliance (at least in the service provider segment) was ~600,000 transactions per year. We go through it every year, and its a headache, but 95% of the requirements are actually reasonable - and the other 5% aren't that big of a deal to meet, as long as your systems were designed for it. But (again, IIRC) there are only around three thousand level one service providers globally, so its not a terrible industry requirement.
You don't. Seriously. You're not an international superspy. Whatever you have that might be worth the trouble --- its not. Just stick the password down somewhere and don't worry about it. Toss it on a sticky note on the inside of a file folder in your filebox (ie: wouldn't be subpoenaed anyway and would be found almost immediately if you died) and stop worrying about it.
it means that an increase in salary isn't a waltz into a higher tax bracket and therefore a counter indication.
Sorry, but you negated whatever points you were making with this. Higher marginal tax brackets have no affect on your existing income, and (other that various loopholes opening and closing which isnt' the point you were making) should never be a bad thing, financially. Failing to grasp (or pretending not to) the fact that only the money you make above the new bracket is taxed at the higher rate, with no change on the taxes paid on the previously earned income, makes it far harder to give credence to any of your other points.
Water covers most of the planet. Desalinization is mostly a problem of not enough energy. Food production also gets a lot easier if artificial lighting makes economic sense - you could literally build a skyscraper and grow food on every floor. Similar to what marijuana growers do when they bypass the electric meters.
Ah. They probably wouldn't be caught as often if they stuck to building 2-3 story buildings, at least in residential areas.
Here's the key quote from the linked Wikipedia entry:
Through Shechtman's discovery, several other groups were able to form similar quasicrystals, finding these materials to have low thermal and electrical conductivity, while possessing high structural stability
That's the difference, right there. Knowing that he had a very controversial claim, he did everything he could to allow others to reproduce his results. Once they tried and succeeded, the rest was (while not a foregone conclusion) history in the making.
In comparison, Rossi has forbidden anyone who actually has enough technical understanding to know what's going on from gaining any information (even seeing the sealed container in which his experiment resides).
No its not. Create a website. Put an eBook on Amazon. There are any number of ways to get ideas to the public.
Getting ideas to the public while at the same time keeping them trade-secrets is hard... but if you're looking for peer review, making them public is a really, really good start. Advertise them. Someone will read it and, if there's anything there, will share it, and you'll find a publication willing to take it.
Or you can just whine loudly about how nobody will listen to that thing you're not actually saying.
Because a decade ago when they started supporting it, the simpler decode path that ALAC used saved a measurable amount of battery power on their users' iPods.
Slashdot Mirror
So... none of the reliability combined with none of the status?
Therefore, many of the interpretations that have arisen, such as the confidentiality of sources, is not based on sound Constitutional interpretation since this doctrine is applied only to bona fide "journalists" and established news sources.
Freedom also means the freedom to take the consequences. Nowhere in the literal words of the constitution is there written that you have an expectation of confidentiality when you speak. Granting additional freedoms to a class of people - in this case, journalists - may be problematic, but you could remove those freedoms and still be well within constitutional restrictions.
Not that I think that they should be removed - just because something's not constitutionally guaranteed doesn't mean its a bad thing - but its not a requirement.
Grammar ? Up you'res !!
Up youre's
FTFY. Remember, an apo'strophe is just English's way of telling you, "Look out! An 'S' is coming!"
All you need is for one person with a larger sales/marketing budget than you to have that line of thinking, and you're basically out of business. That's the real problem - for the inventor to succeed without protection requires everyone to be nice - the first bad apple spoils the bunch. Which is why we have what were supposed to be limited patent/copyright protections, which work quite well - its when they become effectively unlimited that their problems really come to the fore.
If the next JK Rowling were to do so, it would have a big impact.
Or they could just keep using DRM and become a quadrillionaire. Just sayin'.
Glad to hear that the Amazon Kindle(tm) doesn't have that kind of presence, then. Good point, sir.
Very interesting. Even that chart is misleading though - its looking purely at "revenue" (income received) which ignores the fact that distribution costs are vastly higher on physical media sales, even if pre-production costs are identical. Before you had a case where the single and the album cost basicallly the same amount to make, but the album was vastly more popular and more expensive to buy (hence more profitable). Now you have a case where the digital and physical instances are priced similarly, but the digital ones are vastly cheaper to create/distribute (hence more profitable). Any graph that doesn't take that into account is still missing a lot of the picture.
Next you'll be complaining that a quantum leap is about the tiniest change possible.
The thing is, there really is no wolf. At least, not comparitively. More people die and are injured installing solar panels on roofs (a relatively rare form of power generation) than have ever been affected by nuclear disasters. But people falling off of roofs is normal and doesn't make headlines. Same with coal - mining is incredibly dangerous, both individually and geologically, but we're used to it. Nuclear power is (as power generation goes) still by far the safest option out there.
Another way of looking at it is like this.
Buying no tickets costs $0 and gains you nothing, and you have absolutely no chance of winning.
Buying one ticket costs $1 and gains you a pleasant few minutes of fantasy. Might be worth it, might not. It also gives you a real (yet tiny) chance of winning.
Buying ten tickets costs $10 and gains you the same fantasy, but at 10X the price. You still have only a tiny chance of winning.
Bottom line - buy no tickets, or one ticket, but never more than one. There's no gain.
As a general real-world rule of thumb, a convenience item that would cost you $10 in a large US city will cost you £10 in a British one. Its about buying power, not nominal currency exchange rates.
Make it large enough to handle textbook content presented at a readable size (typically letter-sized pages), and I'd be all over it, as long as it allowed me to upload my own pdf's to it, and, perhaps no less important, as long as it wasn't priced ridiculously high. And yeah, I know there's some e-ink readers oout there with displays nearly that big, but the current state of affairs with eink displays totally blows. Page refreshes are so slow that I'd rather carry 20 lbs worth of textbooks than try to use an eink reader for anything other than the reading of fiction.
Actually, full letter size is generally far too large. Take a standrd hardback book, then pare down the margin space you no longer need (and which is to be replaced by screen bezel, not empty pixels), and you've got a very well established field-tested form factor to work with.
There's nothing I put out there, on a blog, comment Facebook, or even (especially) Twitter, that I'd consider to be private information. The stuff I had to reveal to get approved for my mortgage, however, that was private information. See the difference?
Remind me not to eat a meal that you've cooked.
That's the nice thing about Tiny Wings. Just one control - you're either touching the screen (anywhere) or your not.
We have more screen space and screen resolution than ever before
Screen resolutions are pretty much the same as they were 5 years (well even more than that) ago. 22" is still 1680x1050, 24" is still 1920x1200, 30" 2560x1600, etc...
However, more people than before have large, cheap monitors. Reasonable 27" screens can be purchased for a few hundred dollars, great ones for less than a thousand. That's new. That's then causing more people to have higher resolutions than they did 5 years ago.
Releases should be irrelevant for a stable product
iOS anyone? Even when it comes to ubiquitous personal devices like phones, there are always reasons to know what version you're running. Sometimes it's just marketing, sometimes you need to know your old iPhone won't run the latest iOS, so it's time to upgrade. Or not.. sometimes it's about choice. Information is good.
Hence the useful differences between major versions (iOS 4 vs iOS 5) and minor versions (do you even remember what the last point release of iOS 4 was?) - a difference that Firefox has blurred to the point of unusability. Were there really 5 major, product-changing releases between the last point release of FF3 and the current release of FF8?
And everybody's plugins complaining. And the Mozilla product nagging you to upgrade. But apart from that, no, its not obvious at all.
If its a minor upgrade, it should just happen (based on enterprise-settings). If its a major upgrade, it should be there when I, the user, want to make the change. The trouble is that we used to differentiate between those with major and minor version numbers. Firefox no longer has that differentiation, and no longer internally understands the differences.
And for what its worth, full expensive compliance certification is rare as well. Last time I checked, the threshold for needing level one compliance (at least in the service provider segment) was ~600,000 transactions per year. We go through it every year, and its a headache, but 95% of the requirements are actually reasonable - and the other 5% aren't that big of a deal to meet, as long as your systems were designed for it. But (again, IIRC) there are only around three thousand level one service providers globally, so its not a terrible industry requirement.
You don't. Seriously. You're not an international superspy. Whatever you have that might be worth the trouble --- its not. Just stick the password down somewhere and don't worry about it. Toss it on a sticky note on the inside of a file folder in your filebox (ie: wouldn't be subpoenaed anyway and would be found almost immediately if you died) and stop worrying about it.
it means that an increase in salary isn't a waltz into a higher tax bracket and therefore a counter indication.
Sorry, but you negated whatever points you were making with this. Higher marginal tax brackets have no affect on your existing income, and (other that various loopholes opening and closing which isnt' the point you were making) should never be a bad thing, financially. Failing to grasp (or pretending not to) the fact that only the money you make above the new bracket is taxed at the higher rate, with no change on the taxes paid on the previously earned income, makes it far harder to give credence to any of your other points.
Water covers most of the planet. Desalinization is mostly a problem of not enough energy. Food production also gets a lot easier if artificial lighting makes economic sense - you could literally build a skyscraper and grow food on every floor. Similar to what marijuana growers do when they bypass the electric meters.
Ah. They probably wouldn't be caught as often if they stuck to building 2-3 story buildings, at least in residential areas.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dan_Shechtman - as one example of work ridiculed at the time that went on to win a Nobel prize.
Here's the key quote from the linked Wikipedia entry:
Through Shechtman's discovery, several other groups were able to form similar quasicrystals, finding these materials to have low thermal and electrical conductivity, while possessing high structural stability
That's the difference, right there. Knowing that he had a very controversial claim, he did everything he could to allow others to reproduce his results. Once they tried and succeeded, the rest was (while not a foregone conclusion) history in the making.
In comparison, Rossi has forbidden anyone who actually has enough technical understanding to know what's going on from gaining any information (even seeing the sealed container in which his experiment resides).
See the difference?
No its not. Create a website. Put an eBook on Amazon. There are any number of ways to get ideas to the public.
Getting ideas to the public while at the same time keeping them trade-secrets is hard... but if you're looking for peer review, making them public is a really, really good start. Advertise them. Someone will read it and, if there's anything there, will share it, and you'll find a publication willing to take it.
Or you can just whine loudly about how nobody will listen to that thing you're not actually saying.
Because a decade ago when they started supporting it, the simpler decode path that ALAC used saved a measurable amount of battery power on their users' iPods.