Nitrates, which are found in pretty much any kind of meat or leafy vegetable Nearly everything that comes out of the tailpipe of a car An organic compound found in most essential oils and grapefruit juice Rubber The topical medicine used to kill lice A compound formed when cooking any meat An organic compound found in algae and kelp A compound used to make synthetic glycerol used in medical applications Ironically, some of the chemicals used to treat certain types of cancers An antibiotic on the WHO's list of essential medications Most steroids One of the most popular drugs used to treat diabetes Most fire retardants, including the one usually used in solar cells The drink Mate Pretty much anything that is fried
The main problem with Tesla is that, as it sells more cars, the expenditure per car sold rises linearly. That means they aren't getting economies of scale. The more they build, the more they have to spend to support existing vehicles on the road. It isn't clear if it's a quality issue or management issue or support issue or whatever, as they aren't entirely transparent on these types of expenditures, but it's worrying.
There's typically more than one way to accomplish something and Apple was free to use methods for which the patents had expired or to develop their own approach.
C'mon, we all know how this works. Apple probably did figure out a new way of doing it, and it happened to be the same method WARF has a patent for. Because, looking cursorily at WARF's patent, it's a tweak on a global branch prediction circuit.
As for the trial, yeah, try explaining to a judge how a particular tweak to a global branch predictor circuit is obvious. Or how you added further tweaks that make your design work differently enough to not encroach on a particular patent.
If they are interested in making money on patents, then they should either make a product using those patents, or sell them to someone who can use them.
In any case, often times, even coming from universities, the patents applied for are minor tweaks on existing, well established technology. A branch predictor circuit? Those have been around for decades. The really advanced designs were on DEC Alpha chips, whose patents are now held, I believe, by HP. They did global prediction, which sounds an awful lot like what the WARF patent does, and the Alpha came out the same year the WARF patent was filed (it was issued two years later.)
The constitution protects it's citizens from their government. Another way of looking at it is protects groups of people from infringing the rights of others via the government. It's far from perfect, but still works better than most other systems.
A contract is entered into willingly from all parties (if not, it isn't a valid contract) You are agreeing to give up certain rights in exchange for something, usually money. If there is no exchange of value, then it's also not a valid contract
The company I work for has a software product that takes roughly 10 minutes to compile. You don't always have to compile everything, but sometimes you do. The developers get the most cores per dollar they possibly can, as every core cuts down on compile time by a couple of minutes, which can save hours over the course of a month.
"Hi there. Oh I'm just your friendly local congressman. I notice you haven't been doing a lot of lobbying lately. You know, campaign funding, that sort of thing. Say, that's a really nice business model you got going on there. Boy it looks really successful. I'm really happy for you. But, I'm worried about this legislation that's knocking around in congress that might affect it..."
There's a This American Life episode where a congresswoman left, pretty much, that message on someone's answering machine. "I notice your in the construction business and I'm on the panel for construction spending so..."
As I scroll around Santa Clara I see lots and lots of single family detached housing and, probably, duplexes. A mobile home court. A BMX track.
How about zoning for some apartment buildings? The citizens will fight tooth and nail against it, but if you want affordable housing, that's what you build.
On the one hand, Trump is a bit of a cry-bully and CNN can say anything they want.
On the other, when an "unnamed source" says that Trump said something mean to someone in the oval office and CNN covers it for five hours straight, you tend to wonder what the hell is going on. There's some crazy deal going on with Qatar that's just a *bit* more important, why aren't they covering that more?
A year ago? Then I guess the blame is all on you isn't it? A year ago Android 6 was already old news. Why did you buy it?
Because it was the best rated 7-8" tablet at the time. It replaced my broken Nexus 7 which is probably the best 7-8" tablet ever made and had excellent support, but Google stopped making tablets that size.
As lousy as support from Asus is, it seems to be better than Samsung's - my friend has a Galaxy Tab that never got an upgrade off of 4. But neither of them can old a candle to Apple. Our four-year-old 4th gen iPad is still chugging along just fine running iOS 10.
I used an iPhone 4S until about a year ago. I bought it off lease at the tail end of it's production. I then upgraded to an iPhone 5 which I'm using now with the latest iOS.
Not sure what you mean by old models are "obsolete" The Asus Android tablet I bought a year ago is still stuck on 5.1 with no signs that they will offer an update to 6, much less 7.
I'm pretty sure if you get a warrant to search someone's laptop or computer in one jurisdiction, and it turns out the laptop is currently in another jurisdiction, they can't make you go get the laptop and bring it back - they need to get a warrant for the jurisdiction it's in.
The issue is the limit of the judicial district. If you want to search something in a particular place, you get a warrant from a judge in that place. The warrants in question are claiming that since you can access the information anywhere, then the warrant is good for anywhere the information is stored.
VPNs might muddle the issue further, since you could argue it's one large logical network anyways.
The classic yelling fire in a crowded theater is a good example.
This is not illegal. Google it.
Asking someone to commit murder is another example.
The standard is - if there is a reasonable expectation of your speech directly causing harm of someone specifically, then that can be considered incitement to commit violence or murder.
That's it. That's all that should be covered. The other exception is if you are motivated by hatred for some reason or another to commit a crime, which would be a hate crime - then your words can be used against you. But they can't be used to convict you of a crime alone, they have to be coupled with another crime.
Linus Pauling was a certified genius, and basically created the field of molecular biology.
He was also a complete crank who thought Vitamin C could cure any disease, people with genetic defects should be branded so people wouldn't mate with them, and basically shilled for the Soviet Union for decades.
All they do is expand the attack surface making it easier for an attacker to get in.
They do the opposite. If your jail is for Email, and the only thing installed is your email client, and the libraries needed to support it, that *greatly* reduces your attack surface. Heck, run it in a jail with no shell binaries, that alone will kill off most exploits.
A long time ago we used to build secure internet-facing public FTP servers this way. Strip out pretty much everything except a limited shell, that Gnu multi-tool shell thing and an FTP server. A few lines in rc to bring up the network, a single console shell and the FTP daemon. No logger, no cron, no nothing. You could see people trying to hack the server by bounching out of the directory and running stuff via perl or make or something. Hard to exploit stuff when there isn't much to exploit.
Slashdot Mirror
http://www.thewrap.com/11-time...
Still waiting for one RT criticism of Putin.
Find an RT article highly critical of Putin.
Now, find a mainstream US news article highly critical of Trump.
Guess which one is easier?
Crap, I'll find you a dozen Fox News pieces criticizing Trump.
https://www.amazon.com/Enginee...
Applicable in this case, I think.
Just for a bit of perspective:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Nitrates, which are found in pretty much any kind of meat or leafy vegetable
Nearly everything that comes out of the tailpipe of a car
An organic compound found in most essential oils and grapefruit juice
Rubber
The topical medicine used to kill lice
A compound formed when cooking any meat
An organic compound found in algae and kelp
A compound used to make synthetic glycerol used in medical applications
Ironically, some of the chemicals used to treat certain types of cancers
An antibiotic on the WHO's list of essential medications
Most steroids
One of the most popular drugs used to treat diabetes
Most fire retardants, including the one usually used in solar cells
The drink Mate
Pretty much anything that is fried
The main problem with Tesla is that, as it sells more cars, the expenditure per car sold rises linearly. That means they aren't getting economies of scale. The more they build, the more they have to spend to support existing vehicles on the road. It isn't clear if it's a quality issue or management issue or support issue or whatever, as they aren't entirely transparent on these types of expenditures, but it's worrying.
https://seekingalpha.com/artic...
There's typically more than one way to accomplish something and Apple was free to use methods for which the patents had expired or to develop their own approach.
C'mon, we all know how this works. Apple probably did figure out a new way of doing it, and it happened to be the same method WARF has a patent for. Because, looking cursorily at WARF's patent, it's a tweak on a global branch prediction circuit.
As for the trial, yeah, try explaining to a judge how a particular tweak to a global branch predictor circuit is obvious. Or how you added further tweaks that make your design work differently enough to not encroach on a particular patent.
If they are interested in making money on patents, then they should either make a product using those patents, or sell them to someone who can use them.
In any case, often times, even coming from universities, the patents applied for are minor tweaks on existing, well established technology. A branch predictor circuit? Those have been around for decades. The really advanced designs were on DEC Alpha chips, whose patents are now held, I believe, by HP. They did global prediction, which sounds an awful lot like what the WARF patent does, and the Alpha came out the same year the WARF patent was filed (it was issued two years later.)
The constitution protects it's citizens from their government. Another way of looking at it is protects groups of people from infringing the rights of others via the government. It's far from perfect, but still works better than most other systems.
A contract is entered into willingly from all parties (if not, it isn't a valid contract) You are agreeing to give up certain rights in exchange for something, usually money.
If there is no exchange of value, then it's also not a valid contract
Even factoring in maintenance, I bet it's still quite a bit cheaper than a thousand round burst of 20mm Vulcan cannon fire.
The company I work for has a software product that takes roughly 10 minutes to compile. You don't always have to compile everything, but sometimes you do. The developers get the most cores per dollar they possibly can, as every core cuts down on compile time by a couple of minutes, which can save hours over the course of a month.
12 cores for $800? Yes please.
"Hi there. Oh I'm just your friendly local congressman. I notice you haven't been doing a lot of lobbying lately. You know, campaign funding, that sort of thing. Say, that's a really nice business model you got going on there. Boy it looks really successful. I'm really happy for you. But, I'm worried about this legislation that's knocking around in congress that might affect it..."
There's a This American Life episode where a congresswoman left, pretty much, that message on someone's answering machine. "I notice your in the construction business and I'm on the panel for construction spending so..."
As I scroll around Santa Clara I see lots and lots of single family detached housing and, probably, duplexes. A mobile home court. A BMX track.
How about zoning for some apartment buildings? The citizens will fight tooth and nail against it, but if you want affordable housing, that's what you build.
On the one hand, Trump is a bit of a cry-bully and CNN can say anything they want.
On the other, when an "unnamed source" says that Trump said something mean to someone in the oval office and CNN covers it for five hours straight, you tend to wonder what the hell is going on. There's some crazy deal going on with Qatar that's just a *bit* more important, why aren't they covering that more?
What do I use if I just to manage a personal collection of photo memories?
I guess Picasa worked too well so they killed it.
A year ago? Then I guess the blame is all on you isn't it? A year ago Android 6 was already old news. Why did you buy it?
Because it was the best rated 7-8" tablet at the time. It replaced my broken Nexus 7 which is probably the best 7-8" tablet ever made and had excellent support, but Google stopped making tablets that size.
As lousy as support from Asus is, it seems to be better than Samsung's - my friend has a Galaxy Tab that never got an upgrade off of 4. But neither of them can old a candle to Apple. Our four-year-old 4th gen iPad is still chugging along just fine running iOS 10.
So he's traveling from Sweden, which has nothing to do with the travel ban. So why does the article keep mentioning the travel ban?
I used an iPhone 4S until about a year ago. I bought it off lease at the tail end of it's production. I then upgraded to an iPhone 5 which I'm using now with the latest iOS.
Not sure what you mean by old models are "obsolete" The Asus Android tablet I bought a year ago is still stuck on 5.1 with no signs that they will offer an update to 6, much less 7.
I'm pretty sure if you get a warrant to search someone's laptop or computer in one jurisdiction, and it turns out the laptop is currently in another jurisdiction, they can't make you go get the laptop and bring it back - they need to get a warrant for the jurisdiction it's in.
The issue is the limit of the judicial district. If you want to search something in a particular place, you get a warrant from a judge in that place. The warrants in question are claiming that since you can access the information anywhere, then the warrant is good for anywhere the information is stored.
VPNs might muddle the issue further, since you could argue it's one large logical network anyways.
The classic yelling fire in a crowded theater is a good example.
This is not illegal. Google it.
Asking someone to commit murder is another example.
The standard is - if there is a reasonable expectation of your speech directly causing harm of someone specifically, then that can be considered incitement to commit violence or murder.
That's it. That's all that should be covered. The other exception is if you are motivated by hatred for some reason or another to commit a crime, which would be a hate crime - then your words can be used against you. But they can't be used to convict you of a crime alone, they have to be coupled with another crime.
It's already illegal to smash a drone into a plane. I don't think deregulation will make it legal.
A corollary to Zawinski's law of software envelopment:
Every tech company will move into new markets until they have a streaming music service.
Linus Pauling was a certified genius, and basically created the field of molecular biology.
He was also a complete crank who thought Vitamin C could cure any disease, people with genetic defects should be branded so people wouldn't mate with them, and basically shilled for the Soviet Union for decades.
IPX on Token Ring, using Banyan Vines for file sharing. Run the server on OS/2. OpenVMS groupware.
Poor little virii won't know up from down.
All they do is expand the attack surface making it easier for an attacker to get in.
They do the opposite. If your jail is for Email, and the only thing installed is your email client, and the libraries needed to support it, that *greatly* reduces your attack surface. Heck, run it in a jail with no shell binaries, that alone will kill off most exploits.
A long time ago we used to build secure internet-facing public FTP servers this way. Strip out pretty much everything except a limited shell, that Gnu multi-tool shell thing and an FTP server. A few lines in rc to bring up the network, a single console shell and the FTP daemon. No logger, no cron, no nothing. You could see people trying to hack the server by bounching out of the directory and running stuff via perl or make or something. Hard to exploit stuff when there isn't much to exploit.
Separates different browser and email tasks into virtualized jails.
https://www.qubes-os.org/
Kinda like Sandboxie. Speaking of which, sandboxie?