Because when you downloaded it, you also shared it with 10,000, people who also shared it with 10,000 people, etc... All of those people were going to watch that movie at the theater, and buy popcorn and a drink, and buy the special edition DVD, so about say 150$ times oh lets say 2 iterations to be reasonable (we're not monsters!), that's 10,000 x 10,000 which equals 100,000,000 times 150$ a pop, or about 15 Billion dollars.
If you consider we tried to sue a service for 60 Trillion dollars, which is more than the GDP of the entire world, you will get an idea of where their head space is, or how stupid the lobby/politics/courts are in the US.
For example the damages in Canada are very limited by comparison (for now anyway).
Not to defend the Conservatives I dislike, however a few points worth noting. I have had some experience with this.
A) Many of these specialized libraries are not used regularly. There may be a need for the information, and sometimes that need might be more than usual, however for the most part I would bet that most of the staff are not all that busy. Hence the reduction of staff. Though as argued this may have led to a decline in service when they are actually needed, making them even less used, etc... B) Digitizing is expensive. Storing the information is expensive. Organizing the information is expensive. Hosting the information is expensive. Now multiply all those things by a factor of 5 because you have to use government services or contractors to built it, and infrastructure to host it. There are a whole lot of reasons for this which I won't get into, but the fact is it is reality. C) You may or may not agree with it, but if you lower taxes, you need to cut services, and if you cut services you have to decide which ones. Too many people out there somehow think that they don't have to pay taxes and somehow get all the services they want for free. Some have pointed out that the taxes cut are corporate taxes, and I am sure the Conservatives would argue that this makes Canada more competitive and creates jobs. Personally I think that is BS, but the fact is, less taxes means less services.
Anyway many are painting this as some sort of dastardly master plan by the Conservatives to destroy science and push their agenda. I think you are giving them way to much credit. That may be the round about way result, that has some small affect on the some specific long term research, but likely its immediate impact and gains (which is what most political parties are looking for, I highly doubt the Conservatives are playing the long game here) are negligible. This is more a simple consequence of the Conservatives following their ideological plan they got elected for. They cut corporate taxes using the assumption that it would make Canada more competitive and thus more attractive to corporate job creation, this costs money so to make up for it, rather than raise income taxes (which they also said they wouldn't do) the cut services to things which they don't see as A) important, and likely B) will have little impact on the short term while they are in office so as to have little effect on the next election cycle.
So none of this is really all that surprising, nor unexpected. If you want to blame anything it is our electoral process that gives a majority government to party that doesn't even have a majority of the popular vote simply because the left is split, and that because these parties have a election cycle of 4 years, unless you have a strong leader with some legacy fetish, odds are no party will think much longer than those terms.
Not to enter the argument, however one point to make is about the population of Japan. They may have about 130 million people, however A) they are one of the few countries with a demographic of more older people, B) They have few kids, C) as a nation they appear to be a bit anti-immigration.
Not exactly a great combination. Over the next 20 years their population will be in decline as a result.
As a rule no. I would accept the advice of the doctor. However as others have pointed out, many times doctors will proscribe antibiotics "just in case", or "try this and see if it works". There is a reason we have antibiotic resistant bugs out there. Also, being complex systems, antibiotics sometimes do not work the way they are supposed to. After oral surgery I was prescribed an antibiotic (one I had never taken before). It worked too well. It killed off all the good bugs in my gut, allowing for a C. Diff. infection. I was in horrible pain for about 3 days until I could get another different antibiotic to take care of that...
So yes, generally speaking I would trust a doctor, but I do not blindly trust anyone. The same way if I came in with sniffles and he ordered me on a 3 week set of antibiotics, I might question him about it and ask him why. If his answer was to scream that "Antibiotics Work!", and that I am somehow anti-antibiotic I would probably go see another doctor for a 2nd opinion.
I will admit to a bit of skepticism about some of the methods and accuracy of the papers being done. Sure there are a ton of them, but they all pretty much use the same data, which doesn't make them automatically correct by volume. Also "best we have available" doesn't actually mean that it is more relevant. Anyway that said I do think there is change, and that we have had an impact on that. It does get my back up A) when people point and say so many studies, it must be correct, rather than explaining why the studies themselves are correct, i.e. defending the argument and B) labeling anyone who questions anything about it or is critical as deniers. Both of those things are so unscientific it is ironic that it is used so much in this regard. There are plenty of instances throughout history, where the much larger scientific community believed one thing, and only a few people believed something else, and were later proven correct.
Anyway... that's not really what I wanted to post about, but rather the problems inherent to any sort of "fix" to the problem.
If we assume everything to be true, we know what to do, and made a plan to do it, reduce CO2 emissions. The problem with that, is that if we assume all this to be true, and that we humans are the cause, and the cause is from CO2, then we also know that CO2 was generated pretty much from the industrial revolution onward, basically using fossil fuels (coal, later oil) to jump start development, allowing for cheap and fast advancement. The problem is, not all nations moved at the same speed. So you have for instance some which are wealthy and advanced and others not as uniformly so. The political problem is telling wealthy nations they have to stop, hurting their economy, and less developed nations that sorry you will have to curtail your development because the wealthy nations already screwed stuff up.
So you draft a proposal that might be fairer to those nations, allowing them to use more. However this is both unpalatable, as A) the developed nations get their economies hurt, and B) help developing nations get ahead, and C) makes the effort largely useless due to volume. Anyway it is a political mess that ensures things will need to get much worse before anyone does anything about it. In simple terms, the USA is definitely not going to agree to anything if say China does not have to make the same sacrifices. China is not going to do that. Period, full stop. There is no point in making changes hurting yourself, when your neighbor refuses to do so, and in climate change, we are all neighbors.
But isn't this all moot? Unless you are using a satellite phone how exactly is a cell phone supposed to get a signal within a flying plane? I am no expert, but isn't the signals transmitted by ground based stations? I am not sure that they A) have the range, or B) are omni-directional (i.e up). Perhaps at low altitude close to a tower, or on the runway, but I am not sure how well cell technology is going to operate at 30,000ft over nothing.
Seems to indicate that it may be possible, but likely not, and even if it was, impractical.
Wifi is an interesting idea, as it could be used for connectivity. Then again the connection that is used is a satellite one, which likely has some bandwidth restrictions, and is likely costly to operate beyond a certain point.
So for the most part this is a moot argument in the first place.
Ugh. I was in a meeting today where they mentioned "Product" Managers as opposed to Project Managers... I instantly know these are the exact same people just trending themselves differently. They even threw in a "synergy" for humanity's sake! Nearly had to stab myself in the brain with my pen, but managed to just roll my eyes instead.
Love having a 3h meeting where they somehow manage to say absolutely nothing.
Favorite line: "Teams will work collaboratively and independently". Um, what?
While I think that is funny, I think it is more likely that they will integrate it into the Google maps for android. That way if say you are using your iPhone and safari to use Google maps or the iPhone app you can take a hike....then later update the android app to integrate Google+ into Google Maps XD
I work in GIS and with large Oracle databases, and other technical functions. I have run out of local memory on multiple occasions. There is always away around it, however it usually involves breaking you process into digestible chunks, which just means extra work, longer processing time (or not doing it locally if you have the resources which not everyone has access to).
When we finally upgraded to Windows 7, some pinhole made the decision that 32bit was good enough for everyone (among other bad decisions). Those of us in the technical group revolted, REFUSED to accept the upgrade (well delayed anyway) as it did not meet our needs. Eventually the leasing company that had the contract worked with us to make a 64bit specification which did.
However the end result is now the IT folks have to support two sets, one is 32 the other 64, and not everything works on both, causing all sorts of headaches. There are a considerable amount of 64s out there, that have to be dealt with more less manually and by themselves for certain things. If they had realized that a significant part of the business required 64bit machines, they could have saved themselves some headaches and went with that as the standard.
The trend away from desktops to laptops continues. Both AMD and Intel design with this in mind. With Intel the biggest improvement to Haswell was power consumption, which really on a desktop is meaningless for the most part. Both are trying to greatly improve their integrated graphics, because making laptops with dedicated cards is expensive, and you can sell more of the cheaper ones. It is easier to make one more less design.
If you are buying a desktop for gaming the integrated graphics are almost useless dispute improvements (casual gaming, blah blah blah, will be on a phone or tablet now mostly). I would say most people getting a decent CPU will be getting a video card anyway, I mean an i5 or i7 is expensive enough. Though I am sure barebones i3's using only integrated video would be cheap. AMD is cheaper still, but worse in every regard, though their integrated graphics may be slightly better.
The integrated graphics are not totally useless. I recently had some hardware trouble with my video card, and it was nice to have an alternative for testing, and as a back up in case something goes wrong. For example if I had to send my video card back on warranty or something in the mail it would likely be gone for weeks. Which would mean I would have no computer for weeks unless I had another video card as back up that was compatible. This way you still have a computer while waiting for your video card to arrive, and can use it for many things, if not really any gaming.
The guy wasn't shot because he was texting during a movie, or even the previews.
He got shot because he got into a heated argument and altercation with someone who was carrying a guy and obviously trigger happy (or paranoid, or very threatened).
This has little to do with texting and movies, other than it started the whole mess.
One thing that always bugged me (heh, pardon the pun), is that every hacker A) typed perfectly, and B) never made a mistake.
Yes I know they just want to move the movie along, and yes occasionally they would insert a "Permission Denied", but those times where rather than running some predefined application they built in the past, but are doing some mad clickity-clacking on a keyboard to much dramatic effect, I would love to see a syntax error, or even just a debug based on a missed colon, comma, quote, or bracket which is impossible to find, and causes much swearing. It would make anyone that has ever coded anything giggle a little. You can even make it something obvious that the audience can figure out and feel all superior (which it usually is anyway to much chagrin). You don't have to waste a lot of time of the movie of the "hacker" blankly starting at the same code forever, just pan back for a second at a time to hear swearing, then back to others doing something else. You could also just insert a "2 hours later" text...:) Then have the next hacker that walks by spot it in 2 seconds, and then lord it over the poor wretch. Bonus points if you have the first hacker promise to do it in like 2 minutes easy.
Sure it was Bioware before they go bought out, but I'll be getting that as soon as it comes out. Not a huge fan of EA, but I am a huge fan of Mass Effect, so there you go.
Slashdot Mirror
Because when you downloaded it, you also shared it with 10,000, people who also shared it with 10,000 people, etc... All of those people were going to watch that movie at the theater, and buy popcorn and a drink, and buy the special edition DVD, so about say 150$ times oh lets say 2 iterations to be reasonable (we're not monsters!), that's 10,000 x 10,000 which equals 100,000,000 times 150$ a pop, or about 15 Billion dollars.
If you consider we tried to sue a service for 60 Trillion dollars, which is more than the GDP of the entire world, you will get an idea of where their head space is, or how stupid the lobby/politics/courts are in the US.
For example the damages in Canada are very limited by comparison (for now anyway).
Not to defend the Conservatives I dislike, however a few points worth noting. I have had some experience with this.
A) Many of these specialized libraries are not used regularly. There may be a need for the information, and sometimes that need might be more than usual, however for the most part I would bet that most of the staff are not all that busy. Hence the reduction of staff. Though as argued this may have led to a decline in service when they are actually needed, making them even less used, etc...
B) Digitizing is expensive. Storing the information is expensive. Organizing the information is expensive. Hosting the information is expensive. Now multiply all those things by a factor of 5 because you have to use government services or contractors to built it, and infrastructure to host it. There are a whole lot of reasons for this which I won't get into, but the fact is it is reality.
C) You may or may not agree with it, but if you lower taxes, you need to cut services, and if you cut services you have to decide which ones. Too many people out there somehow think that they don't have to pay taxes and somehow get all the services they want for free. Some have pointed out that the taxes cut are corporate taxes, and I am sure the Conservatives would argue that this makes Canada more competitive and creates jobs. Personally I think that is BS, but the fact is, less taxes means less services.
Anyway many are painting this as some sort of dastardly master plan by the Conservatives to destroy science and push their agenda. I think you are giving them way to much credit. That may be the round about way result, that has some small affect on the some specific long term research, but likely its immediate impact and gains (which is what most political parties are looking for, I highly doubt the Conservatives are playing the long game here) are negligible. This is more a simple consequence of the Conservatives following their ideological plan they got elected for. They cut corporate taxes using the assumption that it would make Canada more competitive and thus more attractive to corporate job creation, this costs money so to make up for it, rather than raise income taxes (which they also said they wouldn't do) the cut services to things which they don't see as A) important, and likely B) will have little impact on the short term while they are in office so as to have little effect on the next election cycle.
So none of this is really all that surprising, nor unexpected. If you want to blame anything it is our electoral process that gives a majority government to party that doesn't even have a majority of the popular vote simply because the left is split, and that because these parties have a election cycle of 4 years, unless you have a strong leader with some legacy fetish, odds are no party will think much longer than those terms.
Not to enter the argument, however one point to make is about the population of Japan. They may have about 130 million people, however A) they are one of the few countries with a demographic of more older people, B) They have few kids, C) as a nation they appear to be a bit anti-immigration.
Not exactly a great combination. Over the next 20 years their population will be in decline as a result.
Perhaps a bad choice of analogy... :)
As a rule no. I would accept the advice of the doctor. However as others have pointed out, many times doctors will proscribe antibiotics "just in case", or "try this and see if it works". There is a reason we have antibiotic resistant bugs out there. Also, being complex systems, antibiotics sometimes do not work the way they are supposed to. After oral surgery I was prescribed an antibiotic (one I had never taken before). It worked too well. It killed off all the good bugs in my gut, allowing for a C. Diff. infection. I was in horrible pain for about 3 days until I could get another different antibiotic to take care of that...
So yes, generally speaking I would trust a doctor, but I do not blindly trust anyone. The same way if I came in with sniffles and he ordered me on a 3 week set of antibiotics, I might question him about it and ask him why. If his answer was to scream that "Antibiotics Work!", and that I am somehow anti-antibiotic I would probably go see another doctor for a 2nd opinion.
That sort of escalated rather quickly.
I will admit to a bit of skepticism about some of the methods and accuracy of the papers being done. Sure there are a ton of them, but they all pretty much use the same data, which doesn't make them automatically correct by volume. Also "best we have available" doesn't actually mean that it is more relevant. Anyway that said I do think there is change, and that we have had an impact on that. It does get my back up A) when people point and say so many studies, it must be correct, rather than explaining why the studies themselves are correct, i.e. defending the argument and B) labeling anyone who questions anything about it or is critical as deniers. Both of those things are so unscientific it is ironic that it is used so much in this regard. There are plenty of instances throughout history, where the much larger scientific community believed one thing, and only a few people believed something else, and were later proven correct.
Anyway... that's not really what I wanted to post about, but rather the problems inherent to any sort of "fix" to the problem.
If we assume everything to be true, we know what to do, and made a plan to do it, reduce CO2 emissions.
The problem with that, is that if we assume all this to be true, and that we humans are the cause, and the cause is from CO2, then we also know that CO2 was generated pretty much from the industrial revolution onward, basically using fossil fuels (coal, later oil) to jump start development, allowing for cheap and fast advancement. The problem is, not all nations moved at the same speed. So you have for instance some which are wealthy and advanced and others not as uniformly so. The political problem is telling wealthy nations they have to stop, hurting their economy, and less developed nations that sorry you will have to curtail your development because the wealthy nations already screwed stuff up.
So you draft a proposal that might be fairer to those nations, allowing them to use more. However this is both unpalatable, as A) the developed nations get their economies hurt, and B) help developing nations get ahead, and C) makes the effort largely useless due to volume. Anyway it is a political mess that ensures things will need to get much worse before anyone does anything about it. In simple terms, the USA is definitely not going to agree to anything if say China does not have to make the same sacrifices. China is not going to do that. Period, full stop. There is no point in making changes hurting yourself, when your neighbor refuses to do so, and in climate change, we are all neighbors.
Step 1: Make Bill Cosby your spokesperson
Step 2: Bippin and a Bobbin, flippin and a floppen, pudden pops!
Step 3: PROFIT!!!
By "new oversight" he actually means drones... :)
But isn't this all moot? Unless you are using a satellite phone how exactly is a cell phone supposed to get a signal within a flying plane? I am no expert, but isn't the signals transmitted by ground based stations? I am not sure that they A) have the range, or B) are omni-directional (i.e up). Perhaps at low altitude close to a tower, or on the runway, but I am not sure how well cell technology is going to operate at 30,000ft over nothing.
http://www.911myths.com/html/mobiles_at_altitude.html
Seems to indicate that it may be possible, but likely not, and even if it was, impractical.
Wifi is an interesting idea, as it could be used for connectivity. Then again the connection that is used is a satellite one, which likely has some bandwidth restrictions, and is likely costly to operate beyond a certain point.
So for the most part this is a moot argument in the first place.
"Unfortunately it is agaisn't Google's interest to support it..."
Are you talking about Firefox or W3C? Because I am pretty sure Google is Firefox's single largest contributor of funds.
Ugh. I was in a meeting today where they mentioned "Product" Managers as opposed to Project Managers... I instantly know these are the exact same people just trending themselves differently. They even threw in a "synergy" for humanity's sake! Nearly had to stab myself in the brain with my pen, but managed to just roll my eyes instead.
Love having a 3h meeting where they somehow manage to say absolutely nothing.
Favorite line: "Teams will work collaboratively and independently". Um, what?
While I think that is funny, I think it is more likely that they will integrate it into the Google maps for android. That way if say you are using your iPhone and safari to use Google maps or the iPhone app you can take a hike. ...then later update the android app to integrate Google+ into Google Maps XD
"Why that's the same password as my luggage!"
...is that the Death Star was made from obsolete Star Destroyers?
Fun? XD
I work in GIS and with large Oracle databases, and other technical functions. I have run out of local memory on multiple occasions. There is always away around it, however it usually involves breaking you process into digestible chunks, which just means extra work, longer processing time (or not doing it locally if you have the resources which not everyone has access to).
When we finally upgraded to Windows 7, some pinhole made the decision that 32bit was good enough for everyone (among other bad decisions). Those of us in the technical group revolted, REFUSED to accept the upgrade (well delayed anyway) as it did not meet our needs. Eventually the leasing company that had the contract worked with us to make a 64bit specification which did.
However the end result is now the IT folks have to support two sets, one is 32 the other 64, and not everything works on both, causing all sorts of headaches. There are a considerable amount of 64s out there, that have to be dealt with more less manually and by themselves for certain things. If they had realized that a significant part of the business required 64bit machines, they could have saved themselves some headaches and went with that as the standard.
...In conclusion it was found to be statistically significant that bees indeed do not like to have sensors stuck to them.
This paper is dedicated to poor Jimmy Berton, a grad student who gave his life to further this important revelation. He will be missed.
The trend away from desktops to laptops continues. Both AMD and Intel design with this in mind. With Intel the biggest improvement to Haswell was power consumption, which really on a desktop is meaningless for the most part. Both are trying to greatly improve their integrated graphics, because making laptops with dedicated cards is expensive, and you can sell more of the cheaper ones. It is easier to make one more less design.
If you are buying a desktop for gaming the integrated graphics are almost useless dispute improvements (casual gaming, blah blah blah, will be on a phone or tablet now mostly). I would say most people getting a decent CPU will be getting a video card anyway, I mean an i5 or i7 is expensive enough. Though I am sure barebones i3's using only integrated video would be cheap. AMD is cheaper still, but worse in every regard, though their integrated graphics may be slightly better.
The integrated graphics are not totally useless. I recently had some hardware trouble with my video card, and it was nice to have an alternative for testing, and as a back up in case something goes wrong. For example if I had to send my video card back on warranty or something in the mail it would likely be gone for weeks. Which would mean I would have no computer for weeks unless I had another video card as back up that was compatible. This way you still have a computer while waiting for your video card to arrive, and can use it for many things, if not really any gaming.
Biased summary, and silly comments.
The guy wasn't shot because he was texting during a movie, or even the previews.
He got shot because he got into a heated argument and altercation with someone who was carrying a guy and obviously trigger happy (or paranoid, or very threatened).
This has little to do with texting and movies, other than it started the whole mess.
In Canada, he would have said sorry, put his phone away, and everyone would go for poutine afterwards.
One thing that always bugged me (heh, pardon the pun), is that every hacker A) typed perfectly, and B) never made a mistake.
Yes I know they just want to move the movie along, and yes occasionally they would insert a "Permission Denied", but those times where rather than running some predefined application they built in the past, but are doing some mad clickity-clacking on a keyboard to much dramatic effect, I would love to see a syntax error, or even just a debug based on a missed colon, comma, quote, or bracket which is impossible to find, and causes much swearing. It would make anyone that has ever coded anything giggle a little. You can even make it something obvious that the audience can figure out and feel all superior (which it usually is anyway to much chagrin). You don't have to waste a lot of time of the movie of the "hacker" blankly starting at the same code forever, just pan back for a second at a time to hear swearing, then back to others doing something else. You could also just insert a "2 hours later" text... :) Then have the next hacker that walks by spot it in 2 seconds, and then lord it over the poor wretch. Bonus points if you have the first hacker promise to do it in like 2 minutes easy.
Well the first thing that I thought was implausible was: "Sir, the Oracle cloud has completed your computations"
Clearly a total fabrication.
Though one of my favorite quotes on this topic is Super Troopers: "Enhance!"
Also there seems to be a certain period where all hackers clearly used Apple products, well then again everyone used Apple products.
Those responsible for sacking the people who have just been sacked have been sacked.
Cognitive process completed. You have nothing to worry about meatbag of mostly water.
Sure it was Bioware before they go bought out, but I'll be getting that as soon as it comes out. Not a huge fan of EA, but I am a huge fan of Mass Effect, so there you go.