Zucker knew that the company he ran was about to be hit with the costs of organising a recall on their product. In order to avoid his company having to pay the massive liabilities resulting from their dodgy but profitable marketing strategy, which would have rendered all his shares in the business worthless, he shut down the company and transferred all its funds to himself. That's why the CPSC can go after his personal money - it was the business' money at the point at which he knew it had incurred the liability.
For some reason, the Wall Street Journal and Slashdot want businesses to be able to sell unsafe products, and then transfer all the money to the owners when their actions come back to haunt them, leaving the company unable to pay the costs and the owners with all the profits and immune from legal action to recover any of them.
Somewhere around here I have a Palm V, another similar device from the same era as your Visor. It's powered by a non-removable lithium ion battery held within the device's glued-together outer shell. It's easy to make it seem like technology is moving backwards in terms of repairability if you cherry pick examples, but really this isn't new at all.
Netflix on ChromeOS is locked to Google-authorised hardware. The newer HTML5 EME-based version apparently won't even run unless the hardware is locked down to only run Google-signed kernels and programs - flipping the switch to enable developer mode disables it altogether. Once HTML5 EME becomes widespread and Netflix is able to switch to it on other platforms we can probably say bye-bye to Netflix on Linux for good - but don't worry, it'll be an 100% web standards compliant, plugin-free solution.
Of course, the service they're offering is actually impossible because you can't determine sales taxes from a normal zip code - there are often multiple sales tax regions within one zip code. I have a feeling you'd get into fairly deep legal shit if you relied on them to calculate sales taxes.
Believe it or not, there aren't people with computers or databased that track this information. Sales tax regions are geographical constructs don't correspond to particular zip codes or streets or anything useful like that - you can have two houses that are in the same street and zip code but have different sales tax rates. Hell, two halves of the same house can be in different regions with different sales tax rates - try handling that in a sensible way. There's no automated way of mapping from an address to a sales tax region and there's never going to be.
Yeah, it does that on Linux if you're not using KDE or Gnome from what I recall. If you are it stores the passwords using their encrypted keychain support as of a few versions ago.
That's probably because you have to know about the master password support, then manually go into the preferences and enable it. Naturally hardly anyone does. Meanwhile, Chrome encrypts your passwords with your login password automatically on most supported platforms.
Chrome does store the actual passwords in an encrypted form. Unlike Firefox, it even does so basically automatically without requring users to manually enable password encryption (which I think used to be a fairly well-hidden option).
That's probably because Apple was the first big corporation which refused to license those standards-essential patents under the same RAND terms as all of their competitors, again as a form of corporate warfare - they're trying to get all the R&D work required to make modern mobiles possible for free, whilst suing all their competitors who did do the R&D over crap like swipe-to-unlock, meaning those companies can't even make back their costs by selling their own phones!
Unless you work for either company, you don't know what negotiations have or have not taken place. You only have what is printed in the media. You believe everything you read?
We know that Apple refused to negotiate a license for those patents because the ITC stated, in their ruling, that they ruled against Apple in part because of their failure to negotiate a license for the patents in question.
You might actually be able to find someone who's been to a rainbow parties now - scuttlebutt is that some teens may have seen the media reports and decided to find out what all the fuss was about. If they do exist, it's entirely because of media fearmongering about porn and the sexualisation of kids.
I think we can ignore the studies from either side of the argument and apply a little common sense here in that nothing good can come of it for us as a species.
Well, I'm pretty sure we can ignore the actual research and use "common sense", but that doesn't mean it's a good idea to. Common sense is frequently wrong or contradictory.
At least in the UK, the problem isn't just that there are a handful of extremist feminists, but that essentially all of the feminist lobbying organisations who have influence within the government and the media insist that porn is an attack on women's rights and must be banned. Whenever (say) the BBC wants a feminists or womens-rights perspective on something, they turn to organisations like Object. Your girlfriend's views on feminism and porn are essentially irrelevant from a political perspective.
It was so standard that the ICC compiler apparently didn't bother to do it until after the benchmark was released, probably because it's unusual for anyone to write code that benefits from that optimisation outside of benchmarks.
Wow. What's more, apparently that optimisation was added by Intel after the benchmark was developed:
What's more, this optimization wasn't present in ICC until a recent release. Somehow I don't think that they just now discovered it has general purpose value. More likely case is that they discovered is they could manipulate AnTuTu's scores. Seems to coincide well with this third-party report appearing showing how amazing Atom's perf/W is - using nothing but AnTuTu. Or the leaked scores seen for CloverTrail+ and now BayTrail that are AnTuTu. Is this really a coincidence?
So basically they modified their compiler to optimise away the actual benchmark, then got someone to release a third-party report based solely on the benchmark they'd just manipulated the results of.
No, it couldn't become standard. You know why? Because the entire point of this is to allow access to proprietary, vendor-specific DRM modules, and those DRM modules are intentionally not compatible with each other. (In fact they pretty much have to be in order to be effective as DRM.) As of this announcement, Netflix supports two mutually incompatible, single-platform DRM stacks for HTML5: Microsoft's PlayReady on IE11 and Windows 8.1, and Google's Widevine on non-rooted Chromebooks manufactured by Google partners. If you're not using one of those two stacks, it's both illegal and impossible to use the HTML5 version of Netflix. Firefox user? Forget it. Chrome user on the desktop? No way!
Suppose for instance that Apple decided to support this part of HTML5. You still wouldn't be able to watch Netflix on Apple platforms, even though they supported HTML5 EME, because they have their own DRM scheme which Netflix and Apple would have to negotiate a license for.
It's not just you. Amongst other things the lock screen looks almost identical to Android's at a glance, right down to the default choice of wallpaper. When I first saw a photo of it, I had to double-check it wasn't some tweaked variant of the Android UI, it's that similar.
6" fans are already relatively common as side/top fans on enthusiast PC cases, amongst other places. They're not really that much bigger than the ubiquitous 120mm fan.
Yeah, and depending on how much expansion you need to do you'll end up using the same amount of space as last year's model - except that you'll have replaced a single unit with a bunch of boxes chained together with cables running off external power supplies. Very neat and elegant.
Pretty much a PR release via Ars Technica. They're not questioning what Apple are saying in the slightest, and the general consensus seems to be that not only do conflict-of-interest rules not work the way that Ars Technica is portraying them as working, but also that the legal system wouldn't be able to function if they did. From what I recall the bit where they about the firm "letting one of its partners invest in a patent troll, especially one specially designed to target one of the firm's big clients" is outright false; that person's investment was in an actual company selling actual touch-screen technology to places like museums, made years before Apple started making touch-screen devices.
Or, you can pass on the license, in which case you can't play the game anymore, but your friend can. Now, supposedly these license transfers incur a fee. Possibly, who knows?
According to this story, you can't actually do that. The only way to transfer your license is if you sell the game to one of Microsoft's approved second-hand game retailers for a fraction of the resale value and they then resell it to someone else for near-retail, splitting their profits with Microsoft and the game publisher. You can't transfer the game to someone else and you can't bypass the middleman and their cut by reselling your used games on eBay or Craigslist anymore.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, the CPSC are in the process of going after Zen Magnets and the other sellers too, but don't let little facts like that stop you.
Zucker knew that the company he ran was about to be hit with the costs of organising a recall on their product. In order to avoid his company having to pay the massive liabilities resulting from their dodgy but profitable marketing strategy, which would have rendered all his shares in the business worthless, he shut down the company and transferred all its funds to himself. That's why the CPSC can go after his personal money - it was the business' money at the point at which he knew it had incurred the liability.
For some reason, the Wall Street Journal and Slashdot want businesses to be able to sell unsafe products, and then transfer all the money to the owners when their actions come back to haunt them, leaving the company unable to pay the costs and the owners with all the profits and immune from legal action to recover any of them.
Somewhere around here I have a Palm V, another similar device from the same era as your Visor. It's powered by a non-removable lithium ion battery held within the device's glued-together outer shell. It's easy to make it seem like technology is moving backwards in terms of repairability if you cherry pick examples, but really this isn't new at all.
Netflix on ChromeOS is locked to Google-authorised hardware. The newer HTML5 EME-based version apparently won't even run unless the hardware is locked down to only run Google-signed kernels and programs - flipping the switch to enable developer mode disables it altogether. Once HTML5 EME becomes widespread and Netflix is able to switch to it on other platforms we can probably say bye-bye to Netflix on Linux for good - but don't worry, it'll be an 100% web standards compliant, plugin-free solution.
Of course, the service they're offering is actually impossible because you can't determine sales taxes from a normal zip code - there are often multiple sales tax regions within one zip code. I have a feeling you'd get into fairly deep legal shit if you relied on them to calculate sales taxes.
Believe it or not, there aren't people with computers or databased that track this information. Sales tax regions are geographical constructs don't correspond to particular zip codes or streets or anything useful like that - you can have two houses that are in the same street and zip code but have different sales tax rates. Hell, two halves of the same house can be in different regions with different sales tax rates - try handling that in a sensible way. There's no automated way of mapping from an address to a sales tax region and there's never going to be.
That's not true. There are scores of YouTube playing apps on the iOS app store.
Which now have to use HTML5 to display the videos, something Microsoft is still refusing to do.
Yeah, it does that on Linux if you're not using KDE or Gnome from what I recall. If you are it stores the passwords using their encrypted keychain support as of a few versions ago.
That's probably because you have to know about the master password support, then manually go into the preferences and enable it. Naturally hardly anyone does. Meanwhile, Chrome encrypts your passwords with your login password automatically on most supported platforms.
Chrome does store the actual passwords in an encrypted form. Unlike Firefox, it even does so basically automatically without requring users to manually enable password encryption (which I think used to be a fairly well-hidden option).
OF course slashdotters blamed XP, but investigation showed the IRQ conflicts were caused by crappy ACPI.
You'll no doubt be pleased to hear that UEFI still requires ACPI in all its crappy glory.
That's probably because Apple was the first big corporation which refused to license those standards-essential patents under the same RAND terms as all of their competitors, again as a form of corporate warfare - they're trying to get all the R&D work required to make modern mobiles possible for free, whilst suing all their competitors who did do the R&D over crap like swipe-to-unlock, meaning those companies can't even make back their costs by selling their own phones!
Unless you work for either company, you don't know what negotiations have or have not taken place. You only have what is printed in the media. You believe everything you read?
We know that Apple refused to negotiate a license for those patents because the ITC stated, in their ruling, that they ruled against Apple in part because of their failure to negotiate a license for the patents in question.
You might actually be able to find someone who's been to a rainbow parties now - scuttlebutt is that some teens may have seen the media reports and decided to find out what all the fuss was about. If they do exist, it's entirely because of media fearmongering about porn and the sexualisation of kids.
I think we can ignore the studies from either side of the argument and apply a little common sense here in that nothing good can come of it for us as a species.
Well, I'm pretty sure we can ignore the actual research and use "common sense", but that doesn't mean it's a good idea to. Common sense is frequently wrong or contradictory.
At least in the UK, the problem isn't just that there are a handful of extremist feminists, but that essentially all of the feminist lobbying organisations who have influence within the government and the media insist that porn is an attack on women's rights and must be banned. Whenever (say) the BBC wants a feminists or womens-rights perspective on something, they turn to organisations like Object. Your girlfriend's views on feminism and porn are essentially irrelevant from a political perspective.
It was so standard that the ICC compiler apparently didn't bother to do it until after the benchmark was released, probably because it's unusual for anyone to write code that benefits from that optimisation outside of benchmarks.
Wow. What's more, apparently that optimisation was added by Intel after the benchmark was developed:
What's more, this optimization wasn't present in ICC until a recent release. Somehow I don't think that they just now discovered it has general purpose value. More likely case is that they discovered is they could manipulate AnTuTu's scores. Seems to coincide well with this third-party report appearing showing how amazing Atom's perf/W is - using nothing but AnTuTu. Or the leaked scores seen for CloverTrail+ and now BayTrail that are AnTuTu. Is this really a coincidence?
So basically they modified their compiler to optimise away the actual benchmark, then got someone to release a third-party report based solely on the benchmark they'd just manipulated the results of.
No, it couldn't become standard. You know why? Because the entire point of this is to allow access to proprietary, vendor-specific DRM modules, and those DRM modules are intentionally not compatible with each other. (In fact they pretty much have to be in order to be effective as DRM.) As of this announcement, Netflix supports two mutually incompatible, single-platform DRM stacks for HTML5: Microsoft's PlayReady on IE11 and Windows 8.1, and Google's Widevine on non-rooted Chromebooks manufactured by Google partners. If you're not using one of those two stacks, it's both illegal and impossible to use the HTML5 version of Netflix. Firefox user? Forget it. Chrome user on the desktop? No way!
Suppose for instance that Apple decided to support this part of HTML5. You still wouldn't be able to watch Netflix on Apple platforms, even though they supported HTML5 EME, because they have their own DRM scheme which Netflix and Apple would have to negotiate a license for.
It's not just you. Amongst other things the lock screen looks almost identical to Android's at a glance, right down to the default choice of wallpaper. When I first saw a photo of it, I had to double-check it wasn't some tweaked variant of the Android UI, it's that similar.
6" fans are already relatively common as side/top fans on enthusiast PC cases, amongst other places. They're not really that much bigger than the ubiquitous 120mm fan.
Except that if you look inside, the actual system is triangular in shape. It's basically a cylinder because someone thought that would look cool.
Yeah, and depending on how much expansion you need to do you'll end up using the same amount of space as last year's model - except that you'll have replaced a single unit with a bunch of boxes chained together with cables running off external power supplies. Very neat and elegant.
Pretty much a PR release via Ars Technica. They're not questioning what Apple are saying in the slightest, and the general consensus seems to be that not only do conflict-of-interest rules not work the way that Ars Technica is portraying them as working, but also that the legal system wouldn't be able to function if they did. From what I recall the bit where they about the firm "letting one of its partners invest in a patent troll, especially one specially designed to target one of the firm's big clients" is outright false; that person's investment was in an actual company selling actual touch-screen technology to places like museums, made years before Apple started making touch-screen devices.
Or, you can pass on the license, in which case you can't play the game anymore, but your friend can. Now, supposedly these license transfers incur a fee. Possibly, who knows?
According to this story, you can't actually do that. The only way to transfer your license is if you sell the game to one of Microsoft's approved second-hand game retailers for a fraction of the resale value and they then resell it to someone else for near-retail, splitting their profits with Microsoft and the game publisher. You can't transfer the game to someone else and you can't bypass the middleman and their cut by reselling your used games on eBay or Craigslist anymore.