This argument (software bundling) has been around since 1993. Slashdot has been taking notice of this argument (beginning with IE bundling antitrust debates) going back almost that far. This ruling is about Italian legal standards and technology confusion more than what any of the comments are about. In fact this ruling is about microsoft and it's legacy more than anything else. Every piece of data storing technology has 'software' on it. Most of them can be described as having an OS. Im talking about everything from a flash drive to a car, to computerized airplanes, to CNC routers, to MRI machines, etc. 1) There is no chance in hell even Italy will uphold all electronics be available sans software. 2) Even in a limited situation for computers, requiring a company to warrantee a computer to be run under 100 possible OS's places a high burden on the company and will only happen in nations with very low tax income from computer manufacturers. 3) You can always just build a computer... with any OS you desire. 4) Phone companies wont do it for the same reason they dont adopt Ubuntu PC's.... 6 million daily calls from grandpas who accidentally got the Ubuntu PC and cant get his AOL to work... and by the way, where is the spider solitaire? Not everyone wants to spend days getting everything to work, then still having to remember his "root" . Andyou still have the compatibility problem assuming you get Android on an Iphone and tweak it till it actually works. Now all the Apps in Appstore need to be compatible with all phones, or acknowledge they arent and which they arent... test for all, debug for all, multiple versions of every app, linked features, etc. This is before apple quality testing. Then apple loses their clean 'it just works' appearance (which is their best sales edge) which is exactly what went wrong with Windows and why everyone is disgusted with it. All things to all people=consistently frustratingly sort of compatible. 5) Im not sure cell phone providers would ever allow true open underlying software because they dont trust people with unfettered access to their networks.
Thats why I told several customers to upgrade to 7... because it is what MS told us. Except Access to LPTI and USB ports is different enough that anything except completely monolithic software requires serious technical experience in choosing settings otherwise you cant even print from the device. One important note. If 7 had no drivers for your printer/dongle/adapter for both x32 and x64, (which is a lot of the issue we ran into and why they didnt move on during Vista) XP mode had no access to the device either. A common example is Flexi sign, a proprietary software that you had to pay $6000 for the 7 x64 compatible version. In the time I worked these legacy softwares which have no modern versions with the same options/appearance/utility were absolute stopping points for a specific segment of the population.
When electricity is conducted on a wire,are new electrons sent down the wire riding on the surface? Or are they pushed through the mass of existing electrons and cause one currently in line to bounced off the back end (like a newton's cradle)? Something Ive always wondered...
Because you dont make headlines, get congressional attention, or get federal funding for accusing local hoodlums. Say terrorist and point at something potentially vulnerable and you may just win the lottery. The whole point of this story should be that the guy(s) did a good deal of damage to several components and didnt cause one single outage. The histrionic congressional response "Any guy with a.22 could shut down the whole thing!!!" should be a comedic punchline.
The guardian (Snowden's paper of choice apparently) Says the entire story about this is 'dubious' "The lack of specificity made cybersecurity expert Robert David Graham dubious that the plot NSA claimed to discover matched the one it described on TV. “All they are doing is repeating what Wikipedia says about BIOS,” Graham blogged, “acting as techie talk layered onto the discussion to make it believable, much like how Star Trek episodes talk about warp cores and Jeffries Tubes.” " http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/dec/16/nsa-surveillance-60-minutes-cbs-facts
The details the author poins out about the rest of the NSA statements are revealing as well.
If you actually read the first article it states the primary source of 'subsidy' is tax credits and limits on taxation for certain circumstances. From a 60 year total of around 800 billion, 47% is for direct tax benefits., 20% is for perceived imbalanced price controls and the costs of government oversight (ie the Nuclear regulating agency: NRC), 10% is (mostly to hydroelectric plants) for construction of Dams, access to shipping ports and operations of the Dept of Interior. Which leaves grants for operations of shipping, 6 billion, and R&D expenditures, 153 billion. Thats about 3 billion a year on average of actual subsidy. That is well in line with US government subsidy of other industries... like the 3 billion insurance program for small business loans, or 3 billion for 'improving teachers', or 4 billion for insurance against milk profit margins for farmers. etc, etc
http://funding-programs.idilogic.aidpage.com/
"Rational miners will join this pool to increase their benefits, creating a snowball effect that may end up with a pool commanding a majority of the system's mining power. Such a pool would be able to single-handedly control the blockchain" Sounds like a description of feudalism (at least the economic side). Im not sure that the system can escape being transformed in the same ways economies and currencies have throughout history.
I have to thank you for being the only poster that ive seen actually refer to the game and the article and not some comment on grammar or japanese etiquette.
Gameplay should be important to this remake/sequel. The game was an absolute blast to play. Like a fun metroid. Or castlevania even.
If you want a B&W laser for efficiency go high capacity cartridge and separate drum. Brother machines are fine, but few of them have cartridges over 4000 pages. The real saving comes in when the toner holds 6000 or higher. Canon, Xerox are both fine brands as well. (though dont get the wax based Xerox machines)
For inkjet it completely depends on your usage. Epson makes machines with odd features but print great at high resolution and carry small and expensive PPG cartridges. HP has some midgrade photo printers and some very high efficiency machines (Officejet 7500 etc) I dont like Lexmark or Kodak. Features dominate the inkjet models so look for features you need to be sure they will be there. But each model has unique quirks. The Officejet series seems to like to forget they are on a network, Epsons dont have the comprehensive software you might expect. Kodaks like to kill their printheads...
Be wary of some high end HP inkjets, they are pretty versions of very low end models with low quality prints and inks. The envy series in particular.
According to an article in PC World they are saying EPIC doesnt have standing to request, so the Supreme Court has no petitioner authorizing the court to appeal.
Of Course no one has the standing to go to a Court over this by design (Verizon has to appeal to the NSA or the secret court, not to a public institution) So the supremes might overrule that loophole. Hopefully.
http://www.pcworld.com/article/2054900/supreme-court-shouldnt-review-nsa-spying-case-us-govt-says.html
Actually, by definition they are being held accountable for giving the public an area to express their opinion on the content of their publication. There is a difference. The court should have had to prove the comments are somehow supported instead of assuming that since the comments weren't censored. No sane person could interpret a comments section of an online news publication to be sponsored, factually accurate or even impartial. The comments sections are cesspools because the opinions of the general populace (at least those who need to comment on news publication sites) are chaotic. To hold the newspaper responsible is to believe the newspaper itself encouraged some particular (negative) response. Going beyond that, how was anyone damaged? Would anyone here make business or even personal decisions because 'Anonymous Coward' said "Business Alpha Trinkets is a terrible business that stole my money and gave me no trinkets"? Would that change if a user named Alphatrinketssucks had said it instead? The answer is no. The answer is no because we generally have no respect for the random musings of random internet users because of the longstanding tradition of trolls, flamebaiters, morons and lunatics on the web. They are everywhere. Slashdot, a site where moderation of comments is celebrated around the web, is full of innuendo and accusations against any number of international businesses and individuals. none of which do any harm at all because the people reading the comments dont pay any more heed to the comment than the fact that it is one person's opinion, and maybe not even a particularly well reasoned one. Freedom should win out in this case. Freedom always serves the public better than control.
Two birds with one stone there. Get a safety reputation by those who arent cynical enough to look for ulterior motives and maybe get a few good headlines in the process... And kill off cheap competitors cutting into margin
It begins with Christopher Webster stating in no uncertain terms, this is the way things are and there isnt any methane to be found. His statements clearly hint toward doubt of the earlier measurements..."the plumes were already hard to explain" Only to be contradicted later by Michael Mummy saying "I found them and they were really there... it must be a currently unknown 'process' that destroys methane at something near 100 times the currently accepted natural rate." (summary)
Hilariously, the author combines the competing opinions without directly acknowledging the disagreement.
Bad science doesnt go away, It circles around itself and refuses to admit flaws.
Actually the concept is 300 years old and the term was introduced in 1818... thats a bit longer than 25 years. Your focus on the terms 'excessive' and 'extension' is a focus on IP excesses of length, while the article focuses on protecting ideas of a certain type, deeming a certain category (medicine) to be a right, and therefore morally repugnant to allow profit to be made.
Of course it reinforces inequality. Not everyone has equally valuable ideas. Not everyone equally pursues to exploit those ideas. Not everyone executes a functional strategy to exploit those ideas. It would be a travesty to force Intel to share their schematics and fabrication designs with me or anyone else, just in the interest of 'equality'. Equality in the eyes of government recognition of rights=good. Equality in that all people have rights to your ideas=not good. That is theft, or servitude... neither of which is acceptable in a free society. The entire concept of 'equality' through abolition of IP seems to be balanced on social justice due to there being only one 'right' solution to a given situation. That is a fallacy. In the event I am prohibited from knowing how an Intel chip works, I am yet free to design my own if I have the ingenuity.
This question seems to want to avoid the ethics of the situation entirely. Would I want to be a security admin that prevented, knowing or unknowing, what has been widely considered a heroic act which revealed the scale and depth of intrusion and recording of guiltless individuals' activities? Even removing the massive scale of this issue and Snowden himself... Would I want to build a security system to protect a person or corporation which hides any number of illegal activities a company can do? The concept itself shows a lack of ethical fortitude. The question should be "Do you now feel compelled to create backdoors and loopholes in your work by which the truth can be discovered and revealed to the public about how your employer breaks the law and hurts people?"
Besides. the fact that the NSA, a branch of the US spying agencies, in 2013 doesnt understand about information protection what my local community college understood in 1996 (disabling USB access) is both ridiculous and hilarious.
Since I cant connect to the site Ill presume to know what it might say.
Ad design firms and artists want a subtle and beautiful presentation. The customer might appreciate the subtleties of the design but they also want to find the necessary information quickly and effeciently. If your page is beautiful but the customer cant find what they were looking in around for in around 3 - 8 seconds they will move on. The same is true in television ads and physical signs. Too much subtlety fails to convey the message at all. Ugly sites with blinking text are anything but subtle. Of course your screaming headlines get attention. On the other hand, too many agressive colors or bold fonts and your design becomes unreadable, which causes the reader to be confused about your message. Rather than struggle through your presentation the reader will more likely try to find a more legible site.
Finding a nice balance between beauty and function is the struggle.
They reported the same stuff about a year ago. Water mixed with ammonia is heated by an unstable crust and ejects into space at superheated temperatures. This keeps the surface relatively smooth.
What, are they now MORE convinced that this is water?
Slashdot Mirror
This argument (software bundling) has been around since 1993. Slashdot has been taking notice of this argument (beginning with IE bundling antitrust debates) going back almost that far. This ruling is about Italian legal standards and technology confusion more than what any of the comments are about. In fact this ruling is about microsoft and it's legacy more than anything else. Every piece of data storing technology has 'software' on it. Most of them can be described as having an OS. Im talking about everything from a flash drive to a car, to computerized airplanes, to CNC routers, to MRI machines, etc. 1) There is no chance in hell even Italy will uphold all electronics be available sans software. 2) Even in a limited situation for computers, requiring a company to warrantee a computer to be run under 100 possible OS's places a high burden on the company and will only happen in nations with very low tax income from computer manufacturers. 3) You can always just build a computer... with any OS you desire. 4) Phone companies wont do it for the same reason they dont adopt Ubuntu PC's.... 6 million daily calls from grandpas who accidentally got the Ubuntu PC and cant get his AOL to work... and by the way, where is the spider solitaire? Not everyone wants to spend days getting everything to work, then still having to remember his "root" . Andyou still have the compatibility problem assuming you get Android on an Iphone and tweak it till it actually works. Now all the Apps in Appstore need to be compatible with all phones, or acknowledge they arent and which they arent... test for all, debug for all, multiple versions of every app, linked features, etc. This is before apple quality testing. Then apple loses their clean 'it just works' appearance (which is their best sales edge) which is exactly what went wrong with Windows and why everyone is disgusted with it. All things to all people=consistently frustratingly sort of compatible. 5) Im not sure cell phone providers would ever allow true open underlying software because they dont trust people with unfettered access to their networks.
Thats why I told several customers to upgrade to 7 ... because it is what MS told us. Except Access to LPTI and USB ports is different enough that anything except completely monolithic software requires serious technical experience in choosing settings otherwise you cant even print from the device. One important note. If 7 had no drivers for your printer/dongle/adapter for both x32 and x64, (which is a lot of the issue we ran into and why they didnt move on during Vista) XP mode had no access to the device either. A common example is Flexi sign, a proprietary software that you had to pay $6000 for the 7 x64 compatible version. In the time I worked these legacy softwares which have no modern versions with the same options/appearance/utility were absolute stopping points for a specific segment of the population.
When electricity is conducted on a wire,are new electrons sent down the wire riding on the surface? Or are they pushed through the mass of existing electrons and cause one currently in line to bounced off the back end (like a newton's cradle)? Something Ive always wondered...
Because you dont make headlines, get congressional attention, or get federal funding for accusing local hoodlums. Say terrorist and point at something potentially vulnerable and you may just win the lottery. The whole point of this story should be that the guy(s) did a good deal of damage to several components and didnt cause one single outage. The histrionic congressional response "Any guy with a .22 could shut down the whole thing!!!" should be a comedic punchline.
The guardian (Snowden's paper of choice apparently) Says the entire story about this is 'dubious' "The lack of specificity made cybersecurity expert Robert David Graham dubious that the plot NSA claimed to discover matched the one it described on TV. “All they are doing is repeating what Wikipedia says about BIOS,” Graham blogged, “acting as techie talk layered onto the discussion to make it believable, much like how Star Trek episodes talk about warp cores and Jeffries Tubes.” " http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/dec/16/nsa-surveillance-60-minutes-cbs-facts The details the author poins out about the rest of the NSA statements are revealing as well.
why would they replace the network cables? Why would they make such a big deal about replacing the cables?
If you actually read the first article it states the primary source of 'subsidy' is tax credits and limits on taxation for certain circumstances. From a 60 year total of around 800 billion, 47% is for direct tax benefits., 20% is for perceived imbalanced price controls and the costs of government oversight (ie the Nuclear regulating agency: NRC), 10% is (mostly to hydroelectric plants) for construction of Dams, access to shipping ports and operations of the Dept of Interior. Which leaves grants for operations of shipping, 6 billion, and R&D expenditures, 153 billion. Thats about 3 billion a year on average of actual subsidy. That is well in line with US government subsidy of other industries... like the 3 billion insurance program for small business loans, or 3 billion for 'improving teachers', or 4 billion for insurance against milk profit margins for farmers. etc, etc http://funding-programs.idilogic.aidpage.com/
http://www.nature.com/news/rat-study-sparks-gm-furore-1.11471 According to this, the conclusions are unobtainable because of 1) small sample size, 2) inappropriate subjects (cancer prone rats), 3) unusually long study on inappropriate subjects (apparently the rats in question suffer higher than 50% cancer rates after a year) 4) inappropriate experiment methods (grown crops should be tested in a way to predict dosages more accurately)... From the nature article: The authors concede that Sprague-Dawley rats may not be the best model for such long-term studies... They admit the study is flawed. Instead of arguing to keep flawed conclusions they should do the study again with better subjects and methods. As it is, this seems like the flawed and misleading studies of saccharine in the 70s which took 20 years for California to withdraw. http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=10&ved=0CGcQFjAJ&url=http%3A%2F%2Fcancerres.aacrjournals.org%2Fcontent%2F33%2F11%2F2768.full.pdf&ei=edSYUseBG4jooASo-YCwCg&usg=AFQjCNH4Bo7SBZqLpEPwJ8kmBTzQ-sxckg&sig2=sdNk2Isqa6aryZapEUdVnQ&bvm=bv.57155469,d.cGU&cad=rja
"Rational miners will join this pool to increase their benefits, creating a snowball effect that may end up with a pool commanding a majority of the system's mining power. Such a pool would be able to single-handedly control the blockchain" Sounds like a description of feudalism (at least the economic side). Im not sure that the system can escape being transformed in the same ways economies and currencies have throughout history.
I have to thank you for being the only poster that ive seen actually refer to the game and the article and not some comment on grammar or japanese etiquette. Gameplay should be important to this remake/sequel. The game was an absolute blast to play. Like a fun metroid. Or castlevania even.
If you want a B&W laser for efficiency go high capacity cartridge and separate drum. Brother machines are fine, but few of them have cartridges over 4000 pages. The real saving comes in when the toner holds 6000 or higher. Canon, Xerox are both fine brands as well. (though dont get the wax based Xerox machines) For inkjet it completely depends on your usage. Epson makes machines with odd features but print great at high resolution and carry small and expensive PPG cartridges. HP has some midgrade photo printers and some very high efficiency machines (Officejet 7500 etc) I dont like Lexmark or Kodak. Features dominate the inkjet models so look for features you need to be sure they will be there. But each model has unique quirks. The Officejet series seems to like to forget they are on a network, Epsons dont have the comprehensive software you might expect. Kodaks like to kill their printheads... Be wary of some high end HP inkjets, they are pretty versions of very low end models with low quality prints and inks. The envy series in particular.
According to an article in PC World they are saying EPIC doesnt have standing to request, so the Supreme Court has no petitioner authorizing the court to appeal. Of Course no one has the standing to go to a Court over this by design (Verizon has to appeal to the NSA or the secret court, not to a public institution) So the supremes might overrule that loophole. Hopefully. http://www.pcworld.com/article/2054900/supreme-court-shouldnt-review-nsa-spying-case-us-govt-says.html
Piers Morgan?
Actually, by definition they are being held accountable for giving the public an area to express their opinion on the content of their publication. There is a difference. The court should have had to prove the comments are somehow supported instead of assuming that since the comments weren't censored. No sane person could interpret a comments section of an online news publication to be sponsored, factually accurate or even impartial. The comments sections are cesspools because the opinions of the general populace (at least those who need to comment on news publication sites) are chaotic. To hold the newspaper responsible is to believe the newspaper itself encouraged some particular (negative) response. Going beyond that, how was anyone damaged? Would anyone here make business or even personal decisions because 'Anonymous Coward' said "Business Alpha Trinkets is a terrible business that stole my money and gave me no trinkets"? Would that change if a user named Alphatrinketssucks had said it instead? The answer is no. The answer is no because we generally have no respect for the random musings of random internet users because of the longstanding tradition of trolls, flamebaiters, morons and lunatics on the web. They are everywhere. Slashdot, a site where moderation of comments is celebrated around the web, is full of innuendo and accusations against any number of international businesses and individuals. none of which do any harm at all because the people reading the comments dont pay any more heed to the comment than the fact that it is one person's opinion, and maybe not even a particularly well reasoned one. Freedom should win out in this case. Freedom always serves the public better than control.
Two birds with one stone there. Get a safety reputation by those who arent cynical enough to look for ulterior motives and maybe get a few good headlines in the process... And kill off cheap competitors cutting into margin
It begins with Christopher Webster stating in no uncertain terms, this is the way things are and there isnt any methane to be found. His statements clearly hint toward doubt of the earlier measurements ..."the plumes were already hard to explain" Only to be contradicted later by Michael Mummy saying "I found them and they were really there... it must be a currently unknown 'process' that destroys methane at something near 100 times the currently accepted natural rate." (summary)
Hilariously, the author combines the competing opinions without directly acknowledging the disagreement.
Bad science doesnt go away, It circles around itself and refuses to admit flaws.
"Williams, COM-CINC-PAC, RAM-SET, M-O-S 92, H-TAC, OFSPEC, Pattywhack"... "Pattywhack?" " Give a dog a bone, sir."
Actually the concept is 300 years old and the term was introduced in 1818... thats a bit longer than 25 years. Your focus on the terms 'excessive' and 'extension' is a focus on IP excesses of length, while the article focuses on protecting ideas of a certain type, deeming a certain category (medicine) to be a right, and therefore morally repugnant to allow profit to be made.
But I love the idea.
Of course it reinforces inequality. Not everyone has equally valuable ideas. Not everyone equally pursues to exploit those ideas. Not everyone executes a functional strategy to exploit those ideas. It would be a travesty to force Intel to share their schematics and fabrication designs with me or anyone else, just in the interest of 'equality'. Equality in the eyes of government recognition of rights=good. Equality in that all people have rights to your ideas=not good. That is theft, or servitude... neither of which is acceptable in a free society. The entire concept of 'equality' through abolition of IP seems to be balanced on social justice due to there being only one 'right' solution to a given situation. That is a fallacy. In the event I am prohibited from knowing how an Intel chip works, I am yet free to design my own if I have the ingenuity.
For 33 years the government has been trying to replace the 60 year old air traffic control systems. Three different systems have been tried. The first was a complete write off, meant to be an IBM designed Unix based system, it went overdue by years and billions and was killed off in 1994. http://www.baselinemag.com/c/a/Projects-Processes/The-Ugly-History-of-Tool-Development-at-the-FAA/ The Second named CARTS began in 1996, meant to be a replacement for the aging radar systems the program did replace the older systems in some airports, but again the program was killed for cost overruns and stalled production. http://www.fiercegovernmentit.com/story/tracon-air-traffic-control-modernization-faces-prospect-more-schedule-cost/2013-06-02 http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-05-31/air-traffic-upgrade-over-budget-facing-delays-report.html In 2003 they revived the project with compartmentalized implementations of an integrated system in order to see short term improvements. The first system, a replacement for CARTS renamed STARS) went in in 2012 and it is costing 60% more than expected, with the remaining systems set to be developed and implemented over the next 13 years. The next system to be implemented, ERAM, is already overdue by 4 years, over budget, and according to FAA reports, subject to critical failures and instability. http://www.airtrafficmanagement.net/2013/06/nextgen-over-budget-delays-certain-report/http://www.fiercegovernmentit.com/story/eram-continues-undergo-critical-failures/2012-10-02 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Next_Generation_Air_Transportation_System
This question seems to want to avoid the ethics of the situation entirely. Would I want to be a security admin that prevented, knowing or unknowing, what has been widely considered a heroic act which revealed the scale and depth of intrusion and recording of guiltless individuals' activities? Even removing the massive scale of this issue and Snowden himself... Would I want to build a security system to protect a person or corporation which hides any number of illegal activities a company can do? The concept itself shows a lack of ethical fortitude. The question should be "Do you now feel compelled to create backdoors and loopholes in your work by which the truth can be discovered and revealed to the public about how your employer breaks the law and hurts people?" Besides. the fact that the NSA, a branch of the US spying agencies, in 2013 doesnt understand about information protection what my local community college understood in 1996 (disabling USB access) is both ridiculous and hilarious.
What alternative platform could compete in a market where for the last x years the software has been completely free?
Since I cant connect to the site Ill presume to know what it might say.
Ad design firms and artists want a subtle and beautiful presentation. The customer might appreciate the subtleties of the design but they also want to find the necessary information quickly and effeciently. If your page is beautiful but the customer cant find what they were looking in around for in around 3 - 8 seconds they will move on. The same is true in television ads and physical signs. Too much subtlety fails to convey the message at all. Ugly sites with blinking text are anything but subtle. Of course your screaming headlines get attention. On the other hand, too many agressive colors or bold fonts and your design becomes unreadable, which causes the reader to be confused about your message. Rather than struggle through your presentation the reader will more likely try to find a more legible site.
Finding a nice balance between beauty and function is the struggle.
They reported the same stuff about a year ago. Water mixed with ammonia is heated by an unstable crust and ejects into space at superheated temperatures. This keeps the surface relatively smooth. What, are they now MORE convinced that this is water?