Because 1500 deaths a year occur on the hard shoulder. The longer you and your flat tyre are waiting by the side of the road, the more chance that a silly, every day occurrence turns into a death.
Except changing your own tyre on the hard shoulder of a motorway is one thing you are MOST DEFINITELY IN BIG SHOUTY CAPITAL LETTERS not supposed to do.
What you're supposed to do is get out of the car, stand on the other side of the barrier and call for assistance from there.
Oh and you math geeks, figure out how many pounds of coal was burned to charge that battery halfway.
How about none? I'm not a huge fan of nuclear power, but guess what runs the grid in much of Japan?
I would say there was definitely some coal used for a number of reasons:
1. Robert Llewellyn (who was in the video) is English. 2. The rear number plates on the cars he drove past were yellow. British. 3. The car he was driving had "I am a Mitsubishi electric car" down the side in English. 4. When he drove up to the front gate, he explained to the guard why he was there in English. 5. The charging station had an English UI and a dirty great sign in English saying "Charging station".
I would therefore hazard a guess that he was at Mitsubishi's UK headquarters - and a significant percentage of the UK's power comes from coal.
It's called an abstraction layer, and nothing's stopping the games developers from funding a cross-platform layer which does that. The difficulty is in adding a layer of abstraction, making that layer reasonably platform-independent and still seeing half-decent performance.
They'd be creating a support nightmare for themselves, unless they did something like put a bit of code on there forcing the disk to only boot on "approved" systems, because hardware support for bleeding-edge hardware (particularly graphics cards) can be a bit patchy at the best of times.
There's a special word for a box with a limited range of hardware that runs games directly from a read-only media such as CD or DVD. Now, what was that word again?
By the time you discount all the combinations which sound terrible, you'll have substantially fewer permutations to create. Now, go to any major record company's corporate website and dig out the details for how many songs they claim to hold the copyright to.
It's more-or-less mathematically impossible to write a song today which doesn't have at least a couple of bars which sound like something else. 99 times out of 100, this is a non-issue (either because your song winds up sounding like something that nobody has either heard of or cares about, or because it sounds so obviously like something so fantastically well-known that nobody for one minute - not even the bottom-feeders at the RIAA - believes you'd have been stupid enough to rip it off)
The other 1 time out of 100, you wind up with something like this happening.
Depending on how banks in your part of the world work, that manager may have been telling you the gospel truth. Quite a few banks in the UK have spent the last 10 years or so moving as much responsibility as possible out of the branch managers hands and onto a computer or some sort of centralised call centre.
I assume this is so they can de-skill branch management, though I can see it being a fantastically good way to shoot yourself in the foot.
There is such a tendency on/. to think in black and white.
It's already known by some bad guys. How widely known is another matter altogether - are they discussing it openly on web forums? Discussing it openly on web forums which require registration and somebody who's already on the forum to vouch for you before they'll let you view anything? Discussing it on Usenet? Discussing it under blankets in a locked room after dark?
How widely is it being exploited in the wild? How much is being lost every year through this sort of fraud? How much would it cost to fix?
IIRC this wasn't something big and organised like a press conference, it was the CEO filmed from bridge in the middle of the station by a film crew. My guess is the security guard had no idea who was being filmed.
Alas, what we didn't see in the video was the CEO turning to the guard and saying "Er... excuse me..."
I am fairly convinced that a lot of it comes from two things:
1. Deciding that a place needs more security, and hiring human security guards to provide it. 2. Choosing strategically-shaven chimps as your security guards who feel the need to assert what little authority they're given. (This is more-or-less an inevitable consequence of the fact that most security work is badly paid and intensely boring - it's not the kind of thing that will attract the sharpest tools in the box).
Authority recognises authority, and seldom undermines it. So when the chim^H^H^H^H security guards call for police backup, it's fairly common for the police to back up what they say even if it's patent nonsense. In essence, the law is decided on the fly by the security guard and by the time someone in a higher office has seen sense, it's already been splashed all over the media.
Which would be great - except that the people preparing the newspaper want to prepare a newspaper. They don't want to go to all the time and trouble of preparing a newspaper and on top of that meeting with developers to discuss changes to their toolchain, figuring out how their workflow has changed this week versus last week and figure out how they're going to make a profit now they've had to hire extra help to get the damn thing out. Why have they had to hire extra help? Because they no longer have the time to do everything themselves if they're going to try to replace their entire toolchain over a long period of time.
What you're hoping for is for non-programmers to "get" F/OSS like some sort of religion - but that's not going to happen because for most people the computer is a tool, and when did you last see someone get really excited about a hammer?
If Apple (or {INSERT_COMPANY_HERE}) insist that there's nothing wrong with your product and hence refuse to repair it under warranty, then this makes some sense.
The OP's scenario very much is possible, facebook account or not.
Scenario is:
- OP and his sister have mutual friends. - One or more of those friends happen to work with the OP. - OP's sister and mutual friend are both on facebook. - OP's sister puts up embarrassing photo of brother, may or may not tag him. Note that there's no link because brother has no FB account. - Mutual friend is browsing through OPs sister's photos for whatever reason. Finds embarrassing photo of OP. Prints and distributes it.
Granted, this is something that has always been possible it's just that now it's much easier.
Doesn't help if you don't have an account - people can still add tags and they'll still have your name on them, they just won't be linked to an account and hence won't get privacy settings associated with them.
but I think he failed the initial attitude test and they were trying to goad him into failing it even harder.
Not because of something he said, but the tone in which he said it and the fact he never let the officers get a word in edgeways.
(There is the other, orthogonal issue that nobody ever likes to admit that they're wrong - particularly not when they're in a position of authority - and as soon as something like that happens it's vanishingly unlikely to end nicely for the photographer because the only way it could end nicely is if the police officer could be persuaded to double-check that they were in the right, get told that they weren't, apologise and let the photographer go about their business, which gets less and less likely the longer it goes on because the longer it goes on, the bigger the cock-up the occifer has to admit to.)
Lets simplify it. When push comes to shove and they are chasing a theft suspect, the ability to run, react, tackle, and subdue are at the top of the list. The police officer could not be like Richard Stallman for example. The mere presence of some intellectual brilliance, probably removes any ability to "do the grunt work".
Not just that, I've heard rumours (take them with as much salt as you think such a rumour from someone you've never met babbling on/. deserves) that at least one police force actively discriminates against people who are too smart because such people might start to think for themselves.
Actually, given the enormous amount of "fun" involved in setting up most VC solutions, I'd probably give serious consideration to buying a dedicated tablet that could be centrally configured, bolted to a wall and did nothing but VC.
That's some confident gambling, but I'll put the contents of my billfold on this getting scrapped before it ships. A thousand-dollar video-conferenceing device? Get two netbooks and a coupla six-packs; a much better video-conferencing experience for less!
I have spent countless hours setting up videoconferencing. Put simply, there isn't a solution out there that doesn't suck horribly. If it's any good at all (software or hardware), if it doesn't require countless hours of setting up and it works through most firewalls without having to jump through hoops - I bet you anything you like the thing it sucks is "every penny from your bank account".
If it just requires a fair bit of setting up and quite a bit of firewall magic, it's almost certainly "just" stupidly expensive.
Amazingly enough, there is not yet a law that states you *have* to have an account with Facebook and you *have* to share every detail of your life on it.
Whether or not the OP had a Facebook account wasn't actually mentioned. It was his sister who shared the pictures.
Slashdot Mirror
It's called NTP. You just have to be careful who you choose as your peers.
Because 1500 deaths a year occur on the hard shoulder. The longer you and your flat tyre are waiting by the side of the road, the more chance that a silly, every day occurrence turns into a death.
Except changing your own tyre on the hard shoulder of a motorway is one thing you are MOST DEFINITELY IN BIG SHOUTY CAPITAL LETTERS not supposed to do.
What you're supposed to do is get out of the car, stand on the other side of the barrier and call for assistance from there.
The keyword here is "comparable".
I suspect the motor in your typical golf cart isn't much more powerful than a washing machine.
Oh and you math geeks, figure out how many pounds of coal was burned to charge that battery halfway.
How about none? I'm not a huge fan of nuclear power, but guess what runs the grid in much of Japan?
I would say there was definitely some coal used for a number of reasons:
1. Robert Llewellyn (who was in the video) is English.
2. The rear number plates on the cars he drove past were yellow. British.
3. The car he was driving had "I am a Mitsubishi electric car" down the side in English.
4. When he drove up to the front gate, he explained to the guard why he was there in English.
5. The charging station had an English UI and a dirty great sign in English saying "Charging station".
I would therefore hazard a guess that he was at Mitsubishi's UK headquarters - and a significant percentage of the UK's power comes from coal.
It's called an abstraction layer, and nothing's stopping the games developers from funding a cross-platform layer which does that. The difficulty is in adding a layer of abstraction, making that layer reasonably platform-independent and still seeing half-decent performance.
They'd be creating a support nightmare for themselves, unless they did something like put a bit of code on there forcing the disk to only boot on "approved" systems, because hardware support for bleeding-edge hardware (particularly graphics cards) can be a bit patchy at the best of times.
There's a special word for a box with a limited range of hardware that runs games directly from a read-only media such as CD or DVD. Now, what was that word again?
There's no need.
By the time you discount all the combinations which sound terrible, you'll have substantially fewer permutations to create. Now, go to any major record company's corporate website and dig out the details for how many songs they claim to hold the copyright to.
It's more-or-less mathematically impossible to write a song today which doesn't have at least a couple of bars which sound like something else. 99 times out of 100, this is a non-issue (either because your song winds up sounding like something that nobody has either heard of or cares about, or because it sounds so obviously like something so fantastically well-known that nobody for one minute - not even the bottom-feeders at the RIAA - believes you'd have been stupid enough to rip it off)
The other 1 time out of 100, you wind up with something like this happening.
Depending on how banks in your part of the world work, that manager may have been telling you the gospel truth. Quite a few banks in the UK have spent the last 10 years or so moving as much responsibility as possible out of the branch managers hands and onto a computer or some sort of centralised call centre.
I assume this is so they can de-skill branch management, though I can see it being a fantastically good way to shoot yourself in the foot.
There is such a tendency on /. to think in black and white.
It's already known by some bad guys. How widely known is another matter altogether - are they discussing it openly on web forums? Discussing it openly on web forums which require registration and somebody who's already on the forum to vouch for you before they'll let you view anything? Discussing it on Usenet? Discussing it under blankets in a locked room after dark?
How widely is it being exploited in the wild? How much is being lost every year through this sort of fraud? How much would it cost to fix?
IIRC this wasn't something big and organised like a press conference, it was the CEO filmed from bridge in the middle of the station by a film crew. My guess is the security guard had no idea who was being filmed.
Alas, what we didn't see in the video was the CEO turning to the guard and saying "Er... excuse me..."
But just you try and get one such security guard arrested as a terrorist and see how far it gets you...
How do tourists get around? You have a lot, e.g. from cruise ships. Must they hire cars and use taxis?
IME, this is precisely what you have to do in many parts of the US.
I am fairly convinced that a lot of it comes from two things:
1. Deciding that a place needs more security, and hiring human security guards to provide it.
2. Choosing strategically-shaven chimps as your security guards who feel the need to assert what little authority they're given. (This is more-or-less an inevitable consequence of the fact that most security work is badly paid and intensely boring - it's not the kind of thing that will attract the sharpest tools in the box).
Authority recognises authority, and seldom undermines it. So when the chim^H^H^H^H security guards call for police backup, it's fairly common for the police to back up what they say even if it's patent nonsense. In essence, the law is decided on the fly by the security guard and by the time someone in a higher office has seen sense, it's already been splashed all over the media.
Which would be great - except that the people preparing the newspaper want to prepare a newspaper. They don't want to go to all the time and trouble of preparing a newspaper and on top of that meeting with developers to discuss changes to their toolchain, figuring out how their workflow has changed this week versus last week and figure out how they're going to make a profit now they've had to hire extra help to get the damn thing out. Why have they had to hire extra help? Because they no longer have the time to do everything themselves if they're going to try to replace their entire toolchain over a long period of time.
What you're hoping for is for non-programmers to "get" F/OSS like some sort of religion - but that's not going to happen because for most people the computer is a tool, and when did you last see someone get really excited about a hammer?
If Apple (or {INSERT_COMPANY_HERE}) insist that there's nothing wrong with your product and hence refuse to repair it under warranty, then this makes some sense.
The biggest joke is, Wikileaks doesn't go out there to find news. Wikileaks waits for news to come to it.
You'd think a group of people who were paid to go out and find what was happening in the world would be able to do better....
Actually, that's probably true in more-or-less any country that gives tax breaks to married couples but doesn't allow gay couples similar breaks.
The OP's scenario very much is possible, facebook account or not.
Scenario is:
- OP and his sister have mutual friends.
- One or more of those friends happen to work with the OP.
- OP's sister and mutual friend are both on facebook.
- OP's sister puts up embarrassing photo of brother, may or may not tag him. Note that there's no link because brother has no FB account.
- Mutual friend is browsing through OPs sister's photos for whatever reason. Finds embarrassing photo of OP. Prints and distributes it.
Granted, this is something that has always been possible it's just that now it's much easier.
Doesn't help if you don't have an account - people can still add tags and they'll still have your name on them, they just won't be linked to an account and hence won't get privacy settings associated with them.
There wasn't money left in the budget after buying the endpoints ;)
but I think he failed the initial attitude test and they were trying to goad him into failing it even harder.
Not because of something he said, but the tone in which he said it and the fact he never let the officers get a word in edgeways.
(There is the other, orthogonal issue that nobody ever likes to admit that they're wrong - particularly not when they're in a position of authority - and as soon as something like that happens it's vanishingly unlikely to end nicely for the photographer because the only way it could end nicely is if the police officer could be persuaded to double-check that they were in the right, get told that they weren't, apologise and let the photographer go about their business, which gets less and less likely the longer it goes on because the longer it goes on, the bigger the cock-up the occifer has to admit to.)
Lets simplify it. When push comes to shove and they are chasing a theft suspect, the ability to run, react, tackle, and subdue are at the top of the list. The police officer could not be like Richard Stallman for example. The mere presence of some intellectual brilliance, probably removes any ability to "do the grunt work".
Not just that, I've heard rumours (take them with as much salt as you think such a rumour from someone you've never met babbling on /. deserves) that at least one police force actively discriminates against people who are too smart because such people might start to think for themselves.
Actually, given the enormous amount of "fun" involved in setting up most VC solutions, I'd probably give serious consideration to buying a dedicated tablet that could be centrally configured, bolted to a wall and did nothing but VC.
That's some confident gambling, but I'll put the contents of my billfold on this getting scrapped before it ships. A thousand-dollar video-conferenceing device? Get two netbooks and a coupla six-packs; a much better video-conferencing experience for less!
I have spent countless hours setting up videoconferencing. Put simply, there isn't a solution out there that doesn't suck horribly. If it's any good at all (software or hardware), if it doesn't require countless hours of setting up and it works through most firewalls without having to jump through hoops - I bet you anything you like the thing it sucks is "every penny from your bank account".
If it just requires a fair bit of setting up and quite a bit of firewall magic, it's almost certainly "just" stupidly expensive.
Amazingly enough, there is not yet a law that states you *have* to have an account with Facebook and you *have* to share every detail of your life on it.
Whether or not the OP had a Facebook account wasn't actually mentioned. It was his sister who shared the pictures.
How exactly do you prevent this from happening?