I agree with you. When I get sick, I'll let the doctor tell me what's best.
Unfortunately I can't find the direct quote, but during the recent Congressional committee hearings on the Vioxx debacle an advocate for the AMA said something akin to "doctors don't have the time to keep up with journals/studies/etc., and frequently rely on salespeople for the information on the drugs they prescribe."
Does that shake you faith in the vaunted medical profession at all?
I have _never_, as far as I can recall, set off a detector.
The clerks sometimes suck at deactivating the tags, though.
I was in a Border's book store a few years back doing holiday shopping (buying a CD, actually). The check-out line snaked through about half the store, probably about 60 people in front of me, and 5 registers. While waiting, the detector went off quite a few times, always with the response of "Sir (or Madam), you have to come back to deactive your tag...", presumably annoying the customer and certainly adding to my already painful wait. After finally checking out, I set off the detector on the way out but just kept walking in to the parking lot. The manager hustled after me saying, well, you know..., and really had no comeback to my "What does that do for me? It's not my problem if you can't deactivate the tags properly...".
Upon reflection, the only downside I see is that I might have had a problem returning the merchandise, though I guess a valid receipt and a recounting of the purchase details would have sufficed in the end.
Isn't jitter really the variability in arrival times of packets? In other words, assuming 10 ms packets, and assuming 6 packets (A thru F) with a 1/2 second latency you might see:
sender: ====================== 1:00:00.000 packet A 1:00:00.010 packet B 1:00:00.020 packet C 1:00:00.030 packet D 1:00:00.040 packet E 1:00:00.050 packet F
ideal reception: ====================== 1:00:00.500 1:00:00.510 packet A 1:00:00.520 packet B 1:00:00.530 packet C 1:00:00.540 packet D 1:00:00.560 packet E 1:00:00.570 packet F
jittery reception: ====================== 1:00:00.500 1:00:00.518 packet A 1:00:00.529 packet B 1:00:00.539 packet C 1:00:00.546 packet D 1:00:00.564 packet E 1:00:00.575 packet F
As there is free trade across state lines, companies would move out of California if you raised the taxes.
Your post would carry some weight if you could demonstrate that:
California businesses currently view the state as a "cheap tax" state (i.e. a "bargain") relative to other states, and for that reason are situated in that state; and/or
another (nearby?) state would take on the role of the "bargain" state in which to establish a business if California were to raise taxes.
Since you haven't bothered with such basic details, the post's "Insightful" moderation is a bit silly. It's just as easy to argue that California is under-taxed, and that the state has headroom in which to raise taxes and still be the "best" state in which to establish a business.
But I really don't "see" the ads when I view the pages with the ads in-place. So ethically I don't really know if "viewing" the ads is the right thing to do.
I view the website more as an ad for the print version of PC Magazine. Viewing quality content from their web site reminds me that it still puts out a print version, and there's more of a chance that I'll purchase a subscription, or at least the occasional copy that targets something I'm interested in (e.g. a digital camera review).
Choose the "print" hyperlink on sites like this to avoid most of that "crap" -- on most sites it produces a single (long) page with less graphics. Toss in Mozilla/Firefox with the Adblock plugin and all the crap is gone.
The issue gets a little murky, though. Using traffic shaping for things like offering "gaming-inclined" customers a premium service which prioritizes their IP traffic is arguably valid, as would be offering QOS-guaranteed upstream bandwidth for the MSO's voice offering.
How exactly would your cable company even know you were using Vonage???
By observing the RTP traffic to/from your cable modem?
A traffic shaping policy that deprioritizes and/or limits RTP traffic (or prioritizes something else) on the cable side of the network would do the trick, too.
In practice, the $39.95/mo price would probably be reduced as part of a package price.
And keep in mind that Comcast controls your internet service -- what if they start doing some "traffic shaping" that drops a few (or more than a few) of your Packet8 RTP packets here and there, or offers real QOS guarantees for their telephony traffic (at they expense of your Packet8 traffic)?
An interesting article about a cryptosystem along the lines of what you asked about:
http://theory.lcs.mit.edu/~rivest/chaffing.txt
An excerpt:
I note that it is possible for a stream of packets to contain more
than one subsequence of ``wheat'' packets, in addition to the chaff
packets. Each wheat subsequence would be recognized separately using
a different authentication key. One interesting consequence of this
is that if law enforcement were to demand to see an authentication key
so it could identify the wheat, the sender could yield up one such key
that identifies a wheat subsequence containing an innocuous message as
the wheat, and leaving everything else as ``chaff''. The real message
would still be buried in the chaff. This is reminiscent of the
technique of ``deniable encryption'' proposed by Canetti et
al. (1997).
You really should get sound advice from an accountant and/or lawyer before blindly following that advice. While I'm sure Delaware is corporation-friendly from a legal standpoint, the state where you're really running the business from (and possibly the state of the company you're doing work for) might have there own ideas on what taxes they're due.
For instance, living in NJ, if I incorporated in DE I'd still have to register as a "business doing business" in NJ, I'd still have to do the payroll in NJ, submit the witholdings to NJ, get unemployment insurance in NJ, etc. In other words, pretty much the same monthly and quarterly filings in NJ as if I incorporated in NJ. Toss in the DE fees (e.g. for a Registered Agent) and I'm not sure that you're much ahead of the game for all your troubles.
There's also a promising concurrence starting on p 21, which in part reads:
I write separately to emphasize that our holding should not be limited to the narrow facts
surrounding either the Toner Loading Program or the Printer Engine Program. We should make clear that
in the future companies like Lexmark cannot use the DMCA in conjunction with copyright law to create
monopolies of manufactured goods for themselves just by tweaking the facts of this case: by, for example,
creating a Toner Loading Program that is more complex and "creative" than the one here, or by cutting off
other access to the Printer Engine Program.
and goes on to say:
If we were to adopt Lexmark's reading of the statute,
manufacturers could potentially create monopolies for replacement parts simply by using similar, but more
creative, lock-out codes. Automobile manufacturers, for example, could control the entire market of
replacement parts for their vehicles by including lock-out chips. Congress did not intend to allow the
DMCA to be used offensively in this manner, but rather only sought to reach those who circumvented
protective measures "for the purpose" of pirating works protected by the copyright statute. Unless a plaintiff
can show that a defendant circumvented protective measures for such a purpose, its claim should not be
allowed to go forward. If Lexmark wishes to utilize DMCA protections for (allegedly) copyrightable works,
it should not use such works to prevent competing cartridges from working with its printer.
Interestingly, one of the three "theories of liability" raised in Lexmark's suit was based on copyright law, as "SCC acknowledges that it "slavishly copied" the Toner Loading Program "in the exact format and order" found on Lexmark's cartridge chip". The court reverses the lower court in section III (B) starting on p 9.
Referring to your "SQL join example", doesn't a SQL view get you your T1 equivalent?
(Apologies in advance for possible syntax errors)
CREATE VIEW region_sales AS SELECT A1.region_name REGION, SUM(A2.Sales) SALES FROM Geography A1, Store_Information A2 WHERE A1.store_name = A2.store_name GROUP BY A1.region_name
With that, the end-(user|developer) wouldn't be bothered with JOIN syntax, or perhaps even know about the underlying tables. They could, as you so eloquently put it, "do shit with [it]":
SELECT SALES FROM region_sales WHERE REGION='East';
Using television receiving equipment to receive or record broadcast television programmes without the correct licence is a criminal offence. You could therefore face prosecution and a hefty fine of up to £1,000.
You may be asking yourself 'how will they know if I'm using a TV without a licence?' The answer is through a number of different methods.
At the heart of our operation is the TV Licensing database. It has details of over 26 million UK addresses.
Our officers have access to this computer system and a fleet of detector vans and hand-held detectors to track down and prosecute people who use a television without a licence. To find out how effective our methods are click here.
Each year it becomes easier to find and prosecute people breaking the law in this way.
So please be aware:
Using a television without an appropriate licence is a criminal offence.
Every day we catch an average of 1,200 people using a TV without a licence.
This book provides the best description of what it is like inside the mind of an engineer.
I don't have my copy handy, and maybe the haze of a decade or so is too cloudy to see through, but isn't it also a tale about dealing with mental illness and the perspective that comes with middle-age?
Slashdot Mirror
- 26 July 2004 article
- 27 Nov 2004 article
There are a few on that site about database server performance, too...Does that shake you faith in the vaunted medical profession at all?
I get about the same with a 1998 Honda Civic EX (almost entirely highway, though).
I was in a Border's book store a few years back doing holiday shopping (buying a CD, actually). The check-out line snaked through about half the store, probably about 60 people in front of me, and 5 registers. While waiting, the detector went off quite a few times, always with the response of "Sir (or Madam), you have to come back to deactive your tag...", presumably annoying the customer and certainly adding to my already painful wait. After finally checking out, I set off the detector on the way out but just kept walking in to the parking lot. The manager hustled after me saying, well, you know..., and really had no comeback to my "What does that do for me? It's not my problem if you can't deactivate the tags properly...".
Upon reflection, the only downside I see is that I might have had a problem returning the merchandise, though I guess a valid receipt and a recounting of the purchase details would have sufficed in the end.
- California businesses currently view the state as a "cheap tax" state (i.e. a "bargain") relative to other states, and for that reason are situated in that state; and/or
- another (nearby?) state would take on the role of the "bargain" state in which to establish a business if California were to raise taxes.
Since you haven't bothered with such basic details, the post's "Insightful" moderation is a bit silly. It's just as easy to argue that California is under-taxed, and that the state has headroom in which to raise taxes and still be the "best" state in which to establish a business.I view the website more as an ad for the print version of PC Magazine. Viewing quality content from their web site reminds me that it still puts out a print version, and there's more of a chance that I'll purchase a subscription, or at least the occasional copy that targets something I'm interested in (e.g. a digital camera review).
Choose the "print" hyperlink on sites like this to avoid most of that "crap" -- on most sites it produces a single (long) page with less graphics. Toss in Mozilla/Firefox with the Adblock plugin and all the crap is gone.
Local Number Portability (LNP) is pretty standard these days, I'd expect Comcast would offer it right from the start. Ditto for basic features.
The issue gets a little murky, though. Using traffic shaping for things like offering "gaming-inclined" customers a premium service which prioritizes their IP traffic is arguably valid, as would be offering QOS-guaranteed upstream bandwidth for the MSO's voice offering.
A traffic shaping policy that deprioritizes and/or limits RTP traffic (or prioritizes something else) on the cable side of the network would do the trick, too.
And keep in mind that Comcast controls your internet service -- what if they start doing some "traffic shaping" that drops a few (or more than a few) of your Packet8 RTP packets here and there, or offers real QOS guarantees for their telephony traffic (at they expense of your Packet8 traffic)?
An excerpt:
For instance, living in NJ, if I incorporated in DE I'd still have to register as a "business doing business" in NJ, I'd still have to do the payroll in NJ, submit the witholdings to NJ, get unemployment insurance in NJ, etc. In other words, pretty much the same monthly and quarterly filings in NJ as if I incorporated in NJ. Toss in the DE fees (e.g. for a Registered Agent) and I'm not sure that you're much ahead of the game for all your troubles.
Who not "http://*.doubleclick.net/*", and for that matter "http://ads.*/*" ?
FWIW, I've found PDF to be pretty accurate/flexible/comprehensive in most areas.
(Apologies in advance for possible syntax errors)
With that, the end-(user|developer) wouldn't be bothered with JOIN syntax, or perhaps even know about the underlying tables. They could, as you so eloquently put it, "do shit with [it]":
Welcome to TV Licensing
Detection and Penalties
Could be an urban legend, but doesn't the UK have a television tax, along with some way to check for television usage?
But a good book, nonetheless (on which we seem to agree).