That's how the Fourth Amendment works. However in this case, they've taken it to mean that if the postman were to copy the letter in transit, because it's likely to get lost for example, then it'd be okay for the government to seize that copy, so long as Bob gets his copy first.
That depends on how certain you are of winning. In libel actions were the plaintiff almost invariably wins (in English law), there's little threat of having to meet your own exorbitant court costs. Given the way this is being pushed through I doubt there's a judicial atmosphere in favour of defendants in these sorts of cases.
Good advice, I'll probably be writing to my local lib dem instead, seeing as they're the one whose vote is in jeopardy. If I'm not voting Lib Dem it sure as hell isn't going to Labour or the Conservatives, though, don't worry about that.
The paper got a story from a guy who did a quick-and-dirty unpublished study on how quickly they were approached on a different site entirely, the DM ghostwrote it into a different story entirely about Facebook, ignored the original author's corrections, and put it up on the front page.
A 3 year old knows the difference between a real gun, and a lightweight plastic controller.
To the extent that they can tell it's colder and heavier, sure. Probably not to the extent that they can reason "this is a device that will cause me to die".
Sounds dubious to me that someone who has spent years with guns doesn't know that you don't point it at yourself.
I really doubt that she spent those three years interacting with firearms. For much of that time, she would've been learning to effectively interact with food and simple inanimate objects. Even if she'd spent the whole time on a gun range and not simply living with an individual who, against all common sense, has been given a firearm, I don't think she could've made the cognative leap at that developmental stage.
It's an angle. "Kid causes tragedy with negligently-stored firearm" isn't news any more, it's background noise. If they don't spice it up it's a waste of column inches.
Empirically, cryonics doesn't work. There's not a human being in the world who has ever survived a course of treatment involving sustained cryonic suspension. That's not to say it won't work, but the survival-rate-per-buck has to get pretty low for the option with a hard-zero survival rate to become preferable. When cryonics starts saving some lives, then it'll be something worth choosing for more than intellectual curiosity. Right now it's empirically as viable as trying to reincarnate someone's mind in a clone using their Livejournal entries.
If only we could radio-label bailout cash. It would assist in tracking, and act as a self-interest disincentive for it to be stockpiled in executive bonuses.
This might explain why the issue has shown up more in the US than elsewhere. It countries where most drivers have a manual transmission (as in the UK), when you're stopped you've either got your foot on the clutch or the transmission in neutral, and when under power you can always disconnect the engine by stamping on the clutch.
Apple put out a statement before HTC was actually served, then. Suggests this is more of a PR war than anything else, that they want to reassert the iPhone OS's primacy in the public eye before this year's big Android, WinMo and Symbian handsets get going. Nothing says "their product is a knock-off" like a patent infringement suit.
That's what you get when your markets aren't competitive, so there's no reason for them to embrace new things. Sky, our big satellite TV operator, started agressively pitching a branded PVR system called "Sky Plus" about five years ago, as a selling point versus the entrenched cable companies. Time passes, the idea's lodged on the public mind, and now PVRs are a ubiquitous option when you sign up for a TV service, mandatory with an HDTV service, whether it's through satellite or cable, and there's a concerted marketing effort for free-to-air PVR boxes under the "Freeview Plus" banner. There are about twice as many Sky Plus subscribers on our tiny island as there are TiVo users in the entire US.
Incidentally his web site now has a portrait which is, to quote its properties 2102px × 2871px (scaled to 150px × 200px). What happened, James? You used to be cool.
You misunderstand, they started with the Thrust SSC and then stripped it back a bit. Their next project will use the SR-71 as a starting design on the same principle.
They're not claiming her name as their IP, through copyright or anything else. They've told this skeezy gear company that they can't start using an olympiad's name to sell their crappy products just because that olympiad happens to use their products.
"Gimmicked", how? It's not like there's not a huge amount of people linking to Wikipedia. I'm not sure how boosted search rankings and the corresponding increased traffic helps keep an ad-free site "afloat" either.
Meanwhile, a search for "mass spectrometry" gives me a page copied exactly from a mass spec manufacturer's web site. I can tell because Google helpfully flags the original site as "similar content" on the web. There's not much screening going on there!
Slashdot Mirror
That's how the Fourth Amendment works. However in this case, they've taken it to mean that if the postman were to copy the letter in transit, because it's likely to get lost for example, then it'd be okay for the government to seize that copy, so long as Bob gets his copy first.
That depends on how certain you are of winning. In libel actions were the plaintiff almost invariably wins (in English law), there's little threat of having to meet your own exorbitant court costs. Given the way this is being pushed through I doubt there's a judicial atmosphere in favour of defendants in these sorts of cases.
There's never been a better time to start our own party.
"Sick of those other arseholes? Join us!"
Good advice, I'll probably be writing to my local lib dem instead, seeing as they're the one whose vote is in jeopardy. If I'm not voting Lib Dem it sure as hell isn't going to Labour or the Conservatives, though, don't worry about that.
I don't know, but it's going to cost them my vote come election time. It goes against everything I thought they stood for.
The paper got a story from a guy who did a quick-and-dirty unpublished study on how quickly they were approached on a different site entirely, the DM ghostwrote it into a different story entirely about Facebook, ignored the original author's corrections, and put it up on the front page.
A 3 year old knows the difference between a real gun, and a lightweight plastic controller.
To the extent that they can tell it's colder and heavier, sure. Probably not to the extent that they can reason "this is a device that will cause me to die".
Sounds dubious to me that someone who has spent years with guns doesn't know that you don't point it at yourself.
I really doubt that she spent those three years interacting with firearms. For much of that time, she would've been learning to effectively interact with food and simple inanimate objects. Even if she'd spent the whole time on a gun range and not simply living with an individual who, against all common sense, has been given a firearm, I don't think she could've made the cognative leap at that developmental stage.
It's an angle. "Kid causes tragedy with negligently-stored firearm" isn't news any more, it's background noise. If they don't spice it up it's a waste of column inches.
And speaking of over-reactions...
This system was designed to address exactly the problem you mention with picking out things in low contrast, funnily enough.
directly affected by placing a TV in the child's room
Immediate mental image: the child's weight changing instantly as the TV comes and goes.
It's also conspicuous that it's only the Vodafone version of the handset, which suggests the fault lies much further down the chain than HTC.
Empirically, cryonics doesn't work. There's not a human being in the world who has ever survived a course of treatment involving sustained cryonic suspension. That's not to say it won't work, but the survival-rate-per-buck has to get pretty low for the option with a hard-zero survival rate to become preferable. When cryonics starts saving some lives, then it'll be something worth choosing for more than intellectual curiosity. Right now it's empirically as viable as trying to reincarnate someone's mind in a clone using their Livejournal entries.
"Cancer survival rates suffer due to England's cost cutting." Empirically, they do not.
If only we could radio-label bailout cash. It would assist in tracking, and act as a self-interest disincentive for it to be stockpiled in executive bonuses.
Are you kidding? ACTA's going to harmonise everything so closely to the US that they'll be able to prosecute anyone.
This might explain why the issue has shown up more in the US than elsewhere. It countries where most drivers have a manual transmission (as in the UK), when you're stopped you've either got your foot on the clutch or the transmission in neutral, and when under power you can always disconnect the engine by stamping on the clutch.
Apple put out a statement before HTC was actually served, then. Suggests this is more of a PR war than anything else, that they want to reassert the iPhone OS's primacy in the public eye before this year's big Android, WinMo and Symbian handsets get going. Nothing says "their product is a knock-off" like a patent infringement suit.
That's what you get when your markets aren't competitive, so there's no reason for them to embrace new things. Sky, our big satellite TV operator, started agressively pitching a branded PVR system called "Sky Plus" about five years ago, as a selling point versus the entrenched cable companies. Time passes, the idea's lodged on the public mind, and now PVRs are a ubiquitous option when you sign up for a TV service, mandatory with an HDTV service, whether it's through satellite or cable, and there's a concerted marketing effort for free-to-air PVR boxes under the "Freeview Plus" banner. There are about twice as many Sky Plus subscribers on our tiny island as there are TiVo users in the entire US.
Incidentally his web site now has a portrait which is, to quote its properties 2102px × 2871px (scaled to 150px × 200px). What happened, James? You used to be cool.
Via the Wayback Machine, appropriately enough, James Gleick offers this.
You misunderstand, they started with the Thrust SSC and then stripped it back a bit. Their next project will use the SR-71 as a starting design on the same principle.
They're not claiming her name as their IP, through copyright or anything else. They've told this skeezy gear company that they can't start using an olympiad's name to sell their crappy products just because that olympiad happens to use their products.
"Gimmicked", how? It's not like there's not a huge amount of people linking to Wikipedia. I'm not sure how boosted search rankings and the corresponding increased traffic helps keep an ad-free site "afloat" either.
Meanwhile, a search for "mass spectrometry" gives me a page copied exactly from a mass spec manufacturer's web site. I can tell because Google helpfully flags the original site as "similar content" on the web. There's not much screening going on there!