Perhaps some philosopher could conclude that I've really just abandoned the bikes, and rather than hacking 10% of them, CCC might have done better to hack 100%.
Ah, so without having to think about whether you're stealing from a fellow citizen, you blame it on an unspecified, undefined "philosophy". Ridiculous.
You can't compare the taking you're doing with the Dutch bicycles, because those were intended to be free - here, you're just committing robbery from your neighbor. Everybody leaves bikes locked to public property, everywhere. You just aren't willing to admit that you like being a thief, and only because your victim doesn't get to see or catch you. Because if you did, you'd start stealing from little old ladies, and you'd probably like it too. You have no shame.
Saying that bikes locked to public property are abandoned is absurd - when you park a car on a public street, and lock the doors, you must be abondoning that fine set of wheels, I guess, right? Let me know where you live, and I will come rid the street of your trash!
For the record, Witte Fietsen didn't work because nobody wanted to take responsibility for fixing or replacing broken parts, plus people like you stole the bicycles and painted them other colors.
But words and images are treated much differently in trademark law, if I understand your post correctly. True that one cannot use a confusingly similar image in even an unrelated market, without risk.
But for terms, the word 'Scholar' is surely as generic as 'Windows', and it looks like Microsoft is going to lose that battle. Could you clarify?
"Aha! Google Scholar is free. SciFinder is paid. If Google Scholar wins out, SciFinder loses. They can't sue Google for making information free, but they can sue for trademark. Good luck, ACS. I think you're going to need it."
Great post. Good dirt! And just remember, TANSTAAFL! (a phrase I like to welcome our second term overlords with...:)
What about older machines, is there a boot floppy
on
USB Key Multitool?
·
· Score: 1
that will in turn boot your USB keychain? It would be nice to be able run one of these on USB 1.1 machines too. That'd cover a pretty wide spectrum of machines out there.
Indeed, if this is a compendium of earlier works, stitched together with some new text, that question is up for debate. He's got to be in better shape, though, than was Larry Niven when he took on the later [awful] Ringworld novels...
It looks like common searches
on
Google Suggest
·
· Score: 1
I'm guessing Google bases this list on common searches other people have requested, rather than presenting the entire set of N-grams that begin with the "the" node (which would be enormous.)
What do you mean, let the citizens make the decisions? That's one of the chief, er, strengths of privatization, that it puts the newly converted state program, industry, utility beyond the reach of democracy. Within the privatized org, they're accountable only to themselves. Between the org and the gov, they're accountable to... who?
Privatizing nuclear power is just a scary idea. No accountability means no guaranteed safety. e.g. profits before lives.
Kerry lost largely on high voter turnout for those who opposed him on moral grounds, especially gay marriage.
Which is strange, considering that Kerry was and is against legalizing gay marriage. Ah, hey, were you one of those Republican trolls who stood outside Democratic precinct polling places, falsely claiming Kerry wanted to legalize gay marriage?
Republicans taught us more ways to lie and cheat this past election season.
How do the exit polls you pointed to "perfectly mirror the results"? Maybe I'm misreading, but the CNN exit poll page shows the demographic breakdown of the people who voted for each candidate, but not the percent of the electorate they each received.
To cast the grandparent's point a little broader, the fact that "trade secret" protection covers all the voting machines ensures that only the manufacturers will know the inner workings of those machines. If they contain code to throw voting totals in one direction or the other, we'd never know about it, would we?
That'd be like hiring an outside company to count the votes of your corporate board or union elections: everybody votes in private, the votes are tallied by this company in private, and then the results are announced. How they tallied them, whether they did so honestly, is something you will never know - it comes down to trust. One should never replace accountability with raw trust, that's a recipe for corruption.
Like, Salon's headline at the moment - "Winning on fear itself, the GOP is ready to take the country even farther right."
How does this qualify as hate speech? The president campaigned on the spectre of terror, while his losing war in Iraq is breeding far more terrorists than we've ever encountered before. Daily homicide bombings, Iraqis, journalists, diplomats and relief workers fearing for their lives, not only from the terrorists but the American soldiers themselves.
The GOP *is* fully prepared to take the country further to the right, starting with the now-imminent Supreme Court replacements. No conspiracy, long in planning.
Again, what is hateful about these observations? The other half of the country doesn't want their rights further diluted, while the half that just reelected Bush seems plain happy about it. It's bizzare.
Oh poppycock. You bought into the spin, that's all. *EVERY* legislator takes both sides of an issue (a bill), because they vote against it to turn down a rider or amendment the other side attached. Once that version of the bill is defeated, it's taken up again in new form, without the rider. Then the congressperson votes it up.
That, per the Republican spin machine, is called a "flip-flop." By that definition, every Republican congressperson is a "flip-flopper."
I'm astonished at the rank ignorance of Civics 101 displayed by Republican supporters during this campaign, that they actually bought into that false argument. And it's shameful to me as an American: Bush's campaign exemplifies the level of dishonesty the Republicans have stooped to: engaging in political identity theft.
It'd be unbelievable except that it's done, and it will only get worse from here.
I can't believe Kerry conceded this early, with the electoral vote so close, and damn the popular vote, Bush lost it last time. What if the Electoral College tips the balance back?
And what about the election machines? No Dem lawyers to challenge the integrity of the vote due to the closed-box election machines? Will we never know if this was an electronically stolen election? I think it's gonna be done by a stealthy hacker team who swipe one of each type of election machine, taking them to an undisclosed secure lab, dissecting them until the truth is known, then they'll release a report declaring the findings.
I'll say it loud: Bush is dangerous for security. He has triggered the creating of many more new terrorists. World peace will go downhill from here. Expect abortion to be challenged thanks to imminent Supreme Court replacements.
And those tax cuts? Just a bribe to get a second term: We're all paying that back plus interest for the next couple decades, thank you very much. The Bush economy will obviously not lift that boat far enough to make it float. I know and have met many who voted for Bush purely on the basis of the rebate they received. They make a lot of angry hand-waving gestures when confronted with the fiscal reality that those tax cuts came out of money borrowed against debt - future tax revenues.
...the results tracked very closely ("virtually identical") to other polls run of the same age group, which means that if the results are to be trusted, mobile-only users in this age group are not any different from other voters in this age group, and their exclusion from those other polls is insignificant.
That assertion has no legs. Saying that because set A responds in a way that is similar to set B's response, they are essentially the same and A can be excluded if B is? That's just wrong. For one, the questions used to obtain the responses of the two groups, coming from different polling orgs, will very likely not be the same, which obliterates the base of your assertion.
And, man, "if the results are to be trusted" - that *pegged* the needle on my Strauss-o-meter.
If I compute the hash an already vulnerable voting machine program, or its server component, what does it matter? It was ready to tamper with when it left Diebold, and with the same hash it'll still be vulnerable.
This is a red herring. The voting software's already open to tampering, so a hash is meaningless.
Except that with paper ballots there is a paper trail. With that you can find out that voter's dead, or the reg is fictitious.
However, with Diebold you can simply go in and manipulate totals directly. No physical evidence. Much easier to steal an election, in a currently uncontested way. Of course, the aftermath of this election will probably involve a couple orders of magnitude more attorneys and jurisdictions than in 2000, so it remains to be seen whether an election stolen by computer will go unchallenged.
1. Spend hundreds to thousands of man hours developing GPS unit and software 2. Spend tons of money and time marketing it 3. Give away free to your competition the technology your business is based on 4. Develop massive user loyalty from hackers who won't spend a dime on your product, with some going into business for themselves using your technology, meanwhile racking up bandwidth and tech support costs 5. Bankrupt!
It's one thing to have an extensible API that is hackable and lets others enhance your product-for-sale. It's another to give away the technology to any and all, apparently accepting all outcomes of that (including your competition exploiting your technology), and to call that a business model. It's not.
There's more accurate term for what this is: a hobby.
1. Spend hundreds to thousands of man hours developing GPS unit and software 2. Spend tons of money and time marketing it 3. Give away free to your competition the technology your business is based on 4. ??? 5. Profit!
Actually, what's interesting about money is that it doesn't seem to change that much at all. It became fantastically sophisticated hundreds of years ago... people were engaging in financial manipulations that seem quite modern in their sophistication... So if I had to take a wild guess---and believe me, it is a wild guess---I'd say that money and the way it works is going to be a constant, not a variable.
One word: derivatives. I'm not talking options, which have been around a long, long time, 1500s at least.
Consider this: usually when you place a bet with a bookie or the card dealer, you're betting on the appearance of a certain outcome. When you buy equities, you're hoping for a rise in price (and maybe a dividend distribution, but that's old-skool.)
Today, you can make a bet with your bookie (erm, trader) that a certain market index or rate is going to follow certain pattern during a period of time. That pattern is defined by upper and lower bounds, and it can change up or down, but generally the spread (difference between the bounds) stays the same (on some instruments it can vary.)
To place this bet and win, you need to be at least as smart at math and market(s) in question as the quantitative analyst (usually with a PhD, in physics, engineering or math) who's engineering the other side of that bet.
The underlying financial instruments in these bets is generally not an equity, but something that relates to the price of an equity (or option, etc.) There's no value traded, necessarily, usually; instead, these bets are placed as contingencies or hedges (generally.)
Anyway, my point is that money is leveraged in huge mountainfuls these days, and one of the outcomes is that the value of your home currency is constantly decreasing in value, much faster than prior to the advent of sophisticated markets. The cost for delivering water to your tap, or an apple to your grocer, is relatively fixed in terms of the underlying infrastructure and all. But one of the forces behind costs that keep spiraling up is currency values declining due to the huge forces that affect value these days.
That is what's different from centuries ago. Maybe that wasn't so clear, but it's worth checking out. It's a global scam, no less.
Slashdot Mirror
Perhaps some philosopher could conclude that I've really just abandoned the bikes, and rather than hacking 10% of them, CCC might have done better to hack 100%.
Ah, so without having to think about whether you're stealing from a fellow citizen, you blame it on an unspecified, undefined "philosophy". Ridiculous.
You can't compare the taking you're doing with the Dutch bicycles, because those were intended to be free - here, you're just committing robbery from your neighbor. Everybody leaves bikes locked to public property, everywhere. You just aren't willing to admit that you like being a thief, and only because your victim doesn't get to see or catch you. Because if you did, you'd start stealing from little old ladies, and you'd probably like it too. You have no shame.
Saying that bikes locked to public property are abandoned is absurd - when you park a car on a public street, and lock the doors, you must be abondoning that fine set of wheels, I guess, right? Let me know where you live, and I will come rid the street of your trash!
For the record, Witte Fietsen didn't work because nobody wanted to take responsibility for fixing or replacing broken parts, plus people like you stole the bicycles and painted them other colors.
But words and images are treated much differently in trademark law, if I understand your post correctly. True that one cannot use a confusingly similar image in even an unrelated market, without risk.
But for terms, the word 'Scholar' is surely as generic as 'Windows', and it looks like Microsoft is going to lose that battle. Could you clarify?
"Aha! Google Scholar is free. SciFinder is paid. If Google Scholar wins out, SciFinder loses. They can't sue Google for making information free, but they can sue for trademark. Good luck, ACS. I think you're going to need it."
Great post. Good dirt! And just remember, TANSTAAFL! (a phrase I like to welcome our second term overlords with... :)
that will in turn boot your USB keychain? It would be nice to be able run one of these on USB 1.1 machines too. That'd cover a pretty wide spectrum of machines out there.
Indeed, if this is a compendium of earlier works, stitched together with some new text, that question is up for debate. He's got to be in better shape, though, than was Larry Niven when he took on the later [awful] Ringworld novels...
I'm guessing Google bases this list on common searches other people have requested, rather than presenting the entire set of N-grams that begin with the "the" node (which would be enormous.)
Check it out -
http://extcal.sourceforge.net/
Easy to set up, offers user accounts with varying levels of permissions, multiple views, moderation, etc.
Is that a solution that scales well? Nope. Though the smell of french fries emanating from my pocket would make for interesting conversations...
if i weren't saving the points for pro-Bush trolls.
What do you mean, let the citizens make the decisions? That's one of the chief, er, strengths of privatization, that it puts the newly converted state program, industry, utility beyond the reach of democracy. Within the privatized org, they're accountable only to themselves. Between the org and the gov, they're accountable to... who?
Privatizing nuclear power is just a scary idea. No accountability means no guaranteed safety. e.g. profits before lives.
Kerry lost largely on high voter turnout for those who opposed him on moral grounds, especially gay marriage.
Which is strange, considering that Kerry was and is against legalizing gay marriage. Ah, hey, were you one of those Republican trolls who stood outside Democratic precinct polling places, falsely claiming Kerry wanted to legalize gay marriage?
Republicans taught us more ways to lie and cheat this past election season.
Dave,
How do the exit polls you pointed to "perfectly mirror the results"? Maybe I'm misreading, but the CNN exit poll page shows the demographic breakdown of the people who voted for each candidate, but not the percent of the electorate they each received.
To cast the grandparent's point a little broader, the fact that "trade secret" protection covers all the voting machines ensures that only the manufacturers will know the inner workings of those machines. If they contain code to throw voting totals in one direction or the other, we'd never know about it, would we?
That'd be like hiring an outside company to count the votes of your corporate board or union elections: everybody votes in private, the votes are tallied by this company in private, and then the results are announced. How they tallied them, whether they did so honestly, is something you will never know - it comes down to trust. One should never replace accountability with raw trust, that's a recipe for corruption.
Like, Salon's headline at the moment - "Winning on fear itself, the GOP is ready to take the country even farther right."
How does this qualify as hate speech? The president campaigned on the spectre of terror, while his losing war in Iraq is breeding far more terrorists than we've ever encountered before. Daily homicide bombings, Iraqis, journalists, diplomats and relief workers fearing for their lives, not only from the terrorists but the American soldiers themselves.
The GOP *is* fully prepared to take the country further to the right, starting with the now-imminent Supreme Court replacements. No conspiracy, long in planning.
Again, what is hateful about these observations? The other half of the country doesn't want their rights further diluted, while the half that just reelected Bush seems plain happy about it. It's bizzare.
Let's see... you voted Democratic until you voted for a man because so many people say they hate him?
Yeah, that's a guy who has a lot going for him.
Kerry ... He took both sides of every issue.
Oh poppycock. You bought into the spin, that's all. *EVERY* legislator takes both sides of an issue (a bill), because they vote against it to turn down a rider or amendment the other side attached. Once that version of the bill is defeated, it's taken up again in new form, without the rider. Then the congressperson votes it up.
That, per the Republican spin machine, is called a "flip-flop." By that definition, every Republican congressperson is a "flip-flopper."
I'm astonished at the rank ignorance of Civics 101 displayed by Republican supporters during this campaign, that they actually bought into that false argument. And it's shameful to me as an American: Bush's campaign exemplifies the level of dishonesty the Republicans have stooped to: engaging in political identity theft.
It'd be unbelievable except that it's done, and it will only get worse from here.
I can't believe Kerry conceded this early, with the electoral vote so close, and damn the popular vote, Bush lost it last time. What if the Electoral College tips the balance back?
And what about the election machines? No Dem lawyers to challenge the integrity of the vote due to the closed-box election machines? Will we never know if this was an electronically stolen election? I think it's gonna be done by a stealthy hacker team who swipe one of each type of election machine, taking them to an undisclosed secure lab, dissecting them until the truth is known, then they'll release a report declaring the findings.
I'll say it loud: Bush is dangerous for security. He has triggered the creating of many more new terrorists. World peace will go downhill from here. Expect abortion to be challenged thanks to imminent Supreme Court replacements.
And those tax cuts? Just a bribe to get a second term: We're all paying that back plus interest for the next couple decades, thank you very much. The Bush economy will obviously not lift that boat far enough to make it float. I know and have met many who voted for Bush purely on the basis of the rebate they received. They make a lot of angry hand-waving gestures when confronted with the fiscal reality that those tax cuts came out of money borrowed against debt - future tax revenues.
...the results tracked very closely ("virtually identical") to other polls run of the same age group, which means that if the results are to be trusted, mobile-only users in this age group are not any different from other voters in this age group, and their exclusion from those other polls is insignificant.
That assertion has no legs. Saying that because set A responds in a way that is similar to set B's response, they are essentially the same and A can be excluded if B is? That's just wrong. For one, the questions used to obtain the responses of the two groups, coming from different polling orgs, will very likely not be the same, which obliterates the base of your assertion.
And, man, "if the results are to be trusted" - that *pegged* the needle on my Strauss-o-meter.
This invention is the perfect way to handle your cat.
If I compute the hash an already vulnerable voting machine program, or its server component, what does it matter? It was ready to tamper with when it left Diebold, and with the same hash it'll still be vulnerable.
This is a red herring. The voting software's already open to tampering, so a hash is meaningless.
Except that with paper ballots there is a paper trail. With that you can find out that voter's dead, or the reg is fictitious.
However, with Diebold you can simply go in and manipulate totals directly. No physical evidence. Much easier to steal an election, in a currently uncontested way. Of course, the aftermath of this election will probably involve a couple orders of magnitude more attorneys and jurisdictions than in 2000, so it remains to be seen whether an election stolen by computer will go unchallenged.
1. Spend hundreds to thousands of man hours developing GPS unit and software
2. Spend tons of money and time marketing it
3. Give away free to your competition the technology your business is based on
4. Develop massive user loyalty from hackers who won't spend a dime on your product,
with some going into business for themselves using your technology,
meanwhile racking up bandwidth and tech support costs
5. Bankrupt!
It's one thing to have an extensible API that is hackable and lets others enhance your product-for-sale. It's another to give away the technology to any and all, apparently accepting all outcomes of that (including your competition exploiting your technology), and to call that a business model. It's not.
There's more accurate term for what this is: a hobby.
the GPS software for free
1. Spend hundreds to thousands of man hours developing GPS unit and software
2. Spend tons of money and time marketing it
3. Give away free to your competition the technology your business is based on
4. ???
5. Profit!
Very crafty way to make a living.
Actually, what's interesting about money is that it doesn't seem to change that much at all. It became fantastically sophisticated hundreds of years ago... people were engaging in financial manipulations that seem quite modern in their sophistication... So if I had to take a wild guess---and believe me, it is a wild guess---I'd say that money and the way it works is going to be a constant, not a variable.
One word: derivatives. I'm not talking options, which have been around a long, long time, 1500s at least.
Consider this: usually when you place a bet with a bookie or the card dealer, you're betting on the appearance of a certain outcome. When you buy equities, you're hoping for a rise in price (and maybe a dividend distribution, but that's old-skool.)
Today, you can make a bet with your bookie (erm, trader) that a certain market index or rate is going to follow certain pattern during a period of time. That pattern is defined by upper and lower bounds, and it can change up or down, but generally the spread (difference between the bounds) stays the same (on some instruments it can vary.)
To place this bet and win, you need to be at least as smart at math and market(s) in question as the quantitative analyst (usually with a PhD, in physics, engineering or math) who's engineering the other side of that bet.
There's infamous case of the former treasurer of Orange County, Calif., Robert Citron, where he laid a billion in taxpayer dollars on the table and lost it all.
The underlying financial instruments in these bets is generally not an equity, but something that relates to the price of an equity (or option, etc.) There's no value traded, necessarily, usually; instead, these bets are placed as contingencies or hedges (generally.)
Anyway, my point is that money is leveraged in huge mountainfuls these days, and one of the outcomes is that the value of your home currency is constantly decreasing in value, much faster than prior to the advent of sophisticated markets. The cost for delivering water to your tap, or an apple to your grocer, is relatively fixed in terms of the underlying infrastructure and all. But one of the forces behind costs that keep spiraling up is currency values declining due to the huge forces that affect value these days.
That is what's different from centuries ago. Maybe that wasn't so clear, but it's worth checking out. It's a global scam, no less.
How about an EMP gun, generating a high-energy pulse across the FM radio spectrum?
Booom-bada-bitty Booom-bada-bitty BOOM!