Why is it that a US Politician doing something which favors the US is giving a "middle finger" to the world?
That a politician operates with self-interest is not the issue; that is expected everywhere. That the world's second largest emitter of GH gases feels the token voluntary effort it made to address that situation (reducing emissions by 26% on 2005 figures by 2025) is "unfair" is the "middle finger" of note. The entire exercise was rubbery anyway but rather than simply adjusting their own target or working like adults within the accord, the US chose to chuck a childish tantrum, "It's not fair!" The sheer arrogance that comes with then expecting the rest of the world to come begging to renegotiate is just icing on the cake.
In my country (Australia) a trademark needs to be registered and used in specified classes of goods (34 classes) or services (11 classes). PayPal would fall squarely into "Class 36 Electronic payment services" and Pandora "Class 38 Delivery of digital music by telecommunications". These two trademarks would not clash here (even if PayPal had registered in class 38 they are not using that mark for PayPal Music). Do trademarks work differently in the US?
Protection of the IP in the design is not the same thing as trademark protection.
They only get 10 seconds and are looking for expression of "bubbly personality," not a discussion of the state of political discourse in Australia (which, I grant, could be summed up in a dire 10 seconds). I would expect more dancing fool than verbal analysis... but then I am way outside the target demographic. The whole thing is like an uncontrolled version of Virgin Australia looking for "whacky zany" when interviewing prospective cabin crew.
I suspect that hitting a price point and a market date, something not unique to Asian manufacturers, does far more damage than any regional corporate culture. Money spent on the Tizen OS, beyond something that works well enough to sell, makes Samsung no more money and gets funded accordingly (up-front and afterward to fix the mess).
This is not a ban from primary or secondary schools, only pre-school and day-care facilities where the concentration of children with less developed immunity is high.
They will cry for some national solution to their local problem instead taking even a moment to figure out which local politician needs to be voted out.
You are looking at this the wrong way. No point voting someone out only to get another politician voting the same way. You need to work out who to vote in, not out. Then, of course, that individual has to do what they said they would when the were trying to get elected, be influential enough to sway the vote on a bill to change the status quo, and not hold unacceptable positions on other issues. I venture this might be a hard problem to solve with certainty.
The classic dick-n-balls sketch is not generally a unique identifier that on its own would invalidate the ballot paper: counting such ballots is not new. If you put anything on the ballot paper that can uniquely identify the voter then the vote is informal. A high proportion of voters would be the only person with that name that voted at a particular station. Initial counting will treat ballots containing names as invalid until the race turns out to be tight and the votes might make the difference. A handful of tight races end up with court rulings on whether a name is uniquely identifying or not.
The standard talking point coming out of the ABS is this scenario:
The Census form is the only reliable source of information on whether an individual identifies as being of Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander. So, after the census, if the census name, DOB, and address records are matched against new death records a better picture of indigenous Australian life expectancy can be made. That information is useful when planning programs to improve indeigenous life expectancy.
Neither birth nor death records carry this indigenous origin information. However, it strikes me that this can be achieved a number of ways without keeping the actual name, DOB or address. Hashes of the components (normalised or perhaps several allowing for variant spelling) can just as easily be compared and the sensitive data is never retained.
There are currently legislated protections forbidding the use of this data for any other purpose including law enforcement, courts, or taxation. However, these can easily be remove by an Act of parliament (and are probably already subverted for intelligence agencies). I do not trust future parliaments.
There's no equivalent of that US tradition in most of the world. In Australia, writing your name on the ballot paper will, with near 100% certainty, make it an informal vote regardless of any other marks in the boxes. If that is your intent then simply placing the unmarked ballot paper in the box has the same effect and requires less effort.
Cameras and recording devices have been prohibited at the majority of live performances since recording devices became practical to carry. Why on Earth should a recording device suddenly be exempt because it is buried in a phone?
I went to see a play in a 300 seat venue on Friday. and was blessed with being adjacent to a drama school group. The on-again off-again blue glow from these infernal devices was bloody distracting. I must, however, concede that I saw nobody recording the performance or using a flash; just completely ignoring the show. I realise that teens and 20-somethings cannot imagine a life without their personal phone but I also wonder why the phone is more important than the music/play/ballet/opera/whatever that they paid good money to see.
If enough leaked to affect 9 employees handling the box after the flight then there's a reasonable possibility that the escaped liquid now poses a corrosion hazard to the aircraft structure. UPS should send them the bill for the complete inspection and overhaul of the affected areas of the aircraft used to transport it. Perhaps that will be more than the fine.
Perhaps our friends at Microsoft got some of their own medicine when Visa/Mastercard said, "That's a lovely discounted merchant fee you have there. Would be a shame if something happened to it." They then "suggested" that accepting payment any other way might be detrimental.
Let's ask Time Warner Cable News for 190 hours of specified short segments of their raw video material with perpetual, unfettered rights to republish, for profit, and with no ongoing royalty. If you could get them to to agree the conditions (unlikely) then I bet they would charge way more than $36k for the privilege. Somehow though they expect the State to do just that without even cost recovery.
I can see a lot of fun with aeronautical obstacle databases if this takes off in a big way. Essentially a power plant will need an airspace allocation up to 10000 feet AGL and a nautical mile or two across. Put a lot of these around a city and there are many aeronautical procedure designers that will certainly be cursing as they try to thread an aircraft safely between them.
The headline is consistent with the article, which does not say there were no humans involved.
At the Ornskoldsvik Airport, one control tower has nobody inside. However, the tower continues to perform its job of guiding planes to the ground safely. The person who controls the landing is in another complex, roughly 90 miles away. That individual has access to cameras which reportedly function better than the average human eye.
That is, the tower building is not manned but there is still a human controller or controllers. Precisely what is being trialled in Alice Springs only with longer distances. It is partly about consolidating the controllers in a less remote area: easier to get people to live there, more likely to retain experienced staff, easier to maintain training currency. This is similar to the existing concentrations of sector controllers in Brisbane and Melbourne, only with different sensor inputs.
Slashdot Mirror
Uluru, you insensitive clod!
Why is it that a US Politician doing something which favors the US is giving a "middle finger" to the world?
That a politician operates with self-interest is not the issue; that is expected everywhere. That the world's second largest emitter of GH gases feels the token voluntary effort it made to address that situation (reducing emissions by 26% on 2005 figures by 2025) is "unfair" is the "middle finger" of note. The entire exercise was rubbery anyway but rather than simply adjusting their own target or working like adults within the accord, the US chose to chuck a childish tantrum, "It's not fair!" The sheer arrogance that comes with then expecting the rest of the world to come begging to renegotiate is just icing on the cake.
ROFL, thanks for reminding me of this gem :)
I'll second that. Oradour-sur-Glane. Remember. Some of the most powerful TV I have ever seen.
I don't think it panders enough to the US audience to gel with the US perception of that war. Of course, my perception of their perception may be off.
In Australia PayPal's double-P is registered in classes 9, 35, 36, 42. Search
Pandora does not seem to have registered their "P" in Australia, but the name "Pandora" is registered in classes 9, 38, and 41. Search
They overlap in "Class 9 Application software", so if Pandora registered the "P" mark here in the same classes there may be a clash.
In my country (Australia) a trademark needs to be registered and used in specified classes of goods (34 classes) or services (11 classes). PayPal would fall squarely into "Class 36 Electronic payment services" and Pandora "Class 38 Delivery of digital music by telecommunications". These two trademarks would not clash here (even if PayPal had registered in class 38 they are not using that mark for PayPal Music). Do trademarks work differently in the US?
Protection of the IP in the design is not the same thing as trademark protection.
Nope.
Just from a few minutes of speech ...
They only get 10 seconds and are looking for expression of "bubbly personality," not a discussion of the state of political discourse in Australia (which, I grant, could be summed up in a dire 10 seconds). I would expect more dancing fool than verbal analysis... but then I am way outside the target demographic. The whole thing is like an uncontrolled version of Virgin Australia looking for "whacky zany" when interviewing prospective cabin crew.
I suspect that hitting a price point and a market date, something not unique to Asian manufacturers, does far more damage than any regional corporate culture. Money spent on the Tizen OS, beyond something that works well enough to sell, makes Samsung no more money and gets funded accordingly (up-front and afterward to fix the mess).
This is not a ban from primary or secondary schools, only pre-school and day-care facilities where the concentration of children with less developed immunity is high.
They will cry for some national solution to their local problem instead taking even a moment to figure out which local politician needs to be voted out.
You are looking at this the wrong way. No point voting someone out only to get another politician voting the same way. You need to work out who to vote in, not out. Then, of course, that individual has to do what they said they would when the were trying to get elected, be influential enough to sway the vote on a bill to change the status quo, and not hold unacceptable positions on other issues. I venture this might be a hard problem to solve with certainty.
national radio regulators' requirement that all stations announce call letters at the same time
Assuming this is true in the US, what problem does this regulation purport to address?
The classic dick-n-balls sketch is not generally a unique identifier that on its own would invalidate the ballot paper: counting such ballots is not new. If you put anything on the ballot paper that can uniquely identify the voter then the vote is informal. A high proportion of voters would be the only person with that name that voted at a particular station. Initial counting will treat ballots containing names as invalid until the race turns out to be tight and the votes might make the difference. A handful of tight races end up with court rulings on whether a name is uniquely identifying or not.
The standard talking point coming out of the ABS is this scenario:
The Census form is the only reliable source of information on whether an individual identifies as being of Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander. So, after the census, if the census name, DOB, and address records are matched against new death records a better picture of indigenous Australian life expectancy can be made. That information is useful when planning programs to improve indeigenous life expectancy.
Neither birth nor death records carry this indigenous origin information. However, it strikes me that this can be achieved a number of ways without keeping the actual name, DOB or address. Hashes of the components (normalised or perhaps several allowing for variant spelling) can just as easily be compared and the sensitive data is never retained.
There are currently legislated protections forbidding the use of this data for any other purpose including law enforcement, courts, or taxation. However, these can easily be remove by an Act of parliament (and are probably already subverted for intelligence agencies). I do not trust future parliaments.
by writing yourself in.
There's no equivalent of that US tradition in most of the world. In Australia, writing your name on the ballot paper will, with near 100% certainty, make it an informal vote regardless of any other marks in the boxes. If that is your intent then simply placing the unmarked ballot paper in the box has the same effect and requires less effort.
Cameras and recording devices have been prohibited at the majority of live performances since recording devices became practical to carry. Why on Earth should a recording device suddenly be exempt because it is buried in a phone?
I went to see a play in a 300 seat venue on Friday. and was blessed with being adjacent to a drama school group. The on-again off-again blue glow from these infernal devices was bloody distracting. I must, however, concede that I saw nobody recording the performance or using a flash; just completely ignoring the show. I realise that teens and 20-somethings cannot imagine a life without their personal phone but I also wonder why the phone is more important than the music/play/ballet/opera/whatever that they paid good money to see.
If enough leaked to affect 9 employees handling the box after the flight then there's a reasonable possibility that the escaped liquid now poses a corrosion hazard to the aircraft structure. UPS should send them the bill for the complete inspection and overhaul of the affected areas of the aircraft used to transport it. Perhaps that will be more than the fine.
No internet = No ads.
... or the last advert it downloaded forever ad ever amen ;)
Neigh.... Surely it is motor-boating or cruising, not sailing?
Not, "How high?" but rather, "How long should I stay up Sir!"
Perhaps our friends at Microsoft got some of their own medicine when Visa/Mastercard said, "That's a lovely discounted merchant fee you have there. Would be a shame if something happened to it." They then "suggested" that accepting payment any other way might be detrimental.
Let's ask Time Warner Cable News for 190 hours of specified short segments of their raw video material with perpetual, unfettered rights to republish, for profit, and with no ongoing royalty. If you could get them to to agree the conditions (unlikely) then I bet they would charge way more than $36k for the privilege. Somehow though they expect the State to do just that without even cost recovery.
I can see a lot of fun with aeronautical obstacle databases if this takes off in a big way. Essentially a power plant will need an airspace allocation up to 10000 feet AGL and a nautical mile or two across. Put a lot of these around a city and there are many aeronautical procedure designers that will certainly be cursing as they try to thread an aircraft safely between them.
how many people are still walking around with dumb phones?
Quite a few. Some, like myself, don't walk around with any sort of phone.
The headline is consistent with the article, which does not say there were no humans involved.
At the Ornskoldsvik Airport, one control tower has nobody inside. However, the tower continues to perform its job of guiding planes to the ground safely. The person who controls the landing is in another complex, roughly 90 miles away. That individual has access to cameras which reportedly function better than the average human eye.
That is, the tower building is not manned but there is still a human controller or controllers. Precisely what is being trialled in Alice Springs only with longer distances. It is partly about consolidating the controllers in a less remote area: easier to get people to live there, more likely to retain experienced staff, easier to maintain training currency. This is similar to the existing concentrations of sector controllers in Brisbane and Melbourne, only with different sensor inputs.