Whoosh. The GP was arguing not law itself, but the rationale behind the law. The history behind the Statute of Anne is part of the legal heritage of Commonwealth countries. The Statute of Anne is no longer the law even in England.
The GP is confused, because one can own a copyright. What is not owned is the work the copyright covers - the copyright only allows the copyright owner to control copying of the work. A copy can be owned by others. e.g., you probably own some books, which you're able to buy, own and sell, but not copy.
" Don't believe me? Read Article 1, Section 8 of the US Constitution."
I don't believe you when you imply that the US Constitution applies to Canada, which is what the article covers. You'd do better to refer to the Statute of Anne, as Canada is a Commonwealth country.
I'd be much more inspired if the headline read "NASA Lifts Supersonic Aircraft Research by $2.3M" instead of "NASA Drops $2.3M On Supersonic Aircraft Research."
But the claim was "batteries that would otherwise be thrown into the trash when the voltage dips to 1.3V or 1.4V."
One doesn't have to look hard to find that an alkaline cell drops to 1.4 V when only about 10% of its energy capacity is used. So I can believe the claim, even though it's exceedingly misleading. I can't think of a device designed for alkaline batteries which would fail to work at even 1.0 V/cell.
From the article: "Batteroo is a Silicon Valley company preparing to release its Batteriser product in September."
"You mean ownership of fully automatic weapons has been banned since 1986."
No, he doesn't even mean that, because it's not true. One can't purchase a new automatic rifle, but you can (subject to state law) buy and/or own one which was registered prior to FOPA in 1986.
You're right. I had alway remembered the rule to be "punctuation goes inside the quotation marks," but that's actually only true for periods and commas.
" It's like a big red button that says DO NOT PUSH."
You know that big button near the door in the data center, the one labeled "Halon?" That's French for "exit," so you push that to unlock the door and get out.
no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Because, if they can show probable cause that something (info regarding terrorism) will be found somewhere (on a phone call), they're not required to (unless they're seizing a person). And why not? The person's identity may be unknown, maybe that's what they're searching for.
The gasoline heater on my VW Camper wouldn't start consistently - it used a small Kettering type driver and coil for the spark igniter. It didn't have enough dwell to create a strong spark, and no real way to adjust it. So, made a driver using a PIC, trimmer potentiometer, a transistor, protection diodes and some passives. I read the pot with the a/d, and used that to set a PWM duty cycle. Adjust the pot for enough dwell to get a consistently strong spark. Once working and adjusted, the whole thing was potted in some JB Weld.
Yep, and they're playing with fire by not releasing source. It only takes one of the hundreds (thousands?) of kernel developers to successfully sue under the GPL. If they're not in compliance, they lose all rights to the kernel, and there's no mechanism to regain those rights. HTC better carefully consider if they can survive as a company without being able to use the Linux kernel in any of their products going forward.
BS. There would be no need to disclose names, so no legal privacy issue.
Any ethical issue is evenly matched. When they ask for your pay stub, they're also gathering info on how much your current employer is paying for the position and skillset on your resume. The ethics are the same for you to disclose that to a potential employer as it is for them to disclose exactly what their existing employees are making.
Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it...
Slashdot Mirror
I'll bet they could do even better if they jimmied the safety switch on the door of their microwave!
Whoosh. The GP was arguing not law itself, but the rationale behind the law. The history behind the Statute of Anne is part of the legal heritage of Commonwealth countries. The Statute of Anne is no longer the law even in England.
The GP is confused, because one can own a copyright. What is not owned is the work the copyright covers - the copyright only allows the copyright owner to control copying of the work. A copy can be owned by others. e.g., you probably own some books, which you're able to buy, own and sell, but not copy.
" Don't believe me? Read Article 1, Section 8 of the US Constitution."
I don't believe you when you imply that the US Constitution applies to Canada, which is what the article covers. You'd do better to refer to the Statute of Anne, as Canada is a Commonwealth country.
"So how many nerds and information technology workers are going to 'reward' Disney by torrenting the new Star Wars movie this December? "
FTFY.
Disney is evil, there's no news here.
I'd be much more inspired if the headline read "NASA Lifts Supersonic Aircraft Research by $2.3M" instead of "NASA Drops $2.3M On Supersonic Aircraft Research."
But the claim was "batteries that would otherwise be thrown into the trash when the voltage dips to 1.3V or 1.4V."
One doesn't have to look hard to find that an alkaline cell drops to 1.4 V when only about 10% of its energy capacity is used. So I can believe the claim, even though it's exceedingly misleading. I can't think of a device designed for alkaline batteries which would fail to work at even 1.0 V/cell.
From the article: "Batteroo is a Silicon Valley company preparing to release its Batteriser product in September."
And don't forget, it's Batterrific!
So, they're all illegal, except those which aren't. It's hard to argue with that.
"You mean ownership of fully automatic weapons has been banned since 1986."
No, he doesn't even mean that, because it's not true. One can't purchase a new automatic rifle, but you can (subject to state law) buy and/or own one which was registered prior to FOPA in 1986.
You're right. I had alway remembered the rule to be "punctuation goes inside the quotation marks," but that's actually only true for periods and commas.
" It's like a big red button that says DO NOT PUSH."
You know that big button near the door in the data center, the one labeled "Halon?" That's French for "exit," so you push that to unlock the door and get out.
Because, if they can show probable cause that something (info regarding terrorism) will be found somewhere (on a phone call), they're not required to (unless they're seizing a person). And why not? The person's identity may be unknown, maybe that's what they're searching for.
Britain? You mean Airstrip One, of course.
The gasoline heater on my VW Camper wouldn't start consistently - it used a small Kettering type driver and coil for the spark igniter. It didn't have enough dwell to create a strong spark, and no real way to adjust it. So, made a driver using a PIC, trimmer potentiometer, a transistor, protection diodes and some passives. I read the pot with the a/d, and used that to set a PWM duty cycle. Adjust the pot for enough dwell to get a consistently strong spark. Once working and adjusted, the whole thing was potted in some JB Weld.
Yep, and they're playing with fire by not releasing source. It only takes one of the hundreds (thousands?) of kernel developers to successfully sue under the GPL. If they're not in compliance, they lose all rights to the kernel, and there's no mechanism to regain those rights. HTC better carefully consider if they can survive as a company without being able to use the Linux kernel in any of their products going forward.
"CANADA IS NOT A STATE!!!"
Of course it isn't. Canada is a province of the US.
BS. There would be no need to disclose names, so no legal privacy issue.
Any ethical issue is evenly matched. When they ask for your pay stub, they're also gathering info on how much your current employer is paying for the position and skillset on your resume. The ethics are the same for you to disclose that to a potential employer as it is for them to disclose exactly what their existing employees are making.
That's fine. I wouldn't want to work for a company which required disclosing past salary history.
"Then you lose your offer when you're asked for a recent pay stub."
The obvious response to which is, "Sure, but in exchange, I'll need copies of the pay stubs for those working for you in comparable positions."
"Though just because "everyone else is doing it"..."
To paraphrase Yossarian, "Then, I'd certainly be a damned fool to do it any other way, wouldn't I?"
The Russian government has more efficient and cost effective methods of corruption.
A strange game. The only winning move is not to play. How about a nice game of chess?
Yep, and since when is someone who writes such an app a "hacker?" They may be a reprobate, but they haven't hacked anything.