what do you mean so long to get this to market? it has been in the market for a long time now and is being used by quite a few large companies for various engineering, design and architecture work. Seems so far it is hugely successful though incredibly pricey as each device is multiple thousands of dollars..
That does not prove they removed it from the case, you could do that simply by booting it from a USB key and doing that. They specifically say they can forensically prove the files were copied while it was removed from the computer case.
considering the amount of judges and lawyers that were all just recently rounded up by the government as supposed traitors I can see a shit load of reasons why a judge would comply.
So how exactly do you forensically determine files were copied onto a computer by someone after removing the HDD and then returning it? I am sure that could of happened but how the fuck would you ever tell?
only if you mistreat or neglect her, otherwise she is far more stable and certainly environmentally cleaner than just about any other option currently available.
fucking retard, learning how investments works. If you give away 40 billion (approximately what he has given so far) and earn 60 billion your net worth grows. would take you all of 10 seconds to search on the web to see what he does for charity and the millions of children he has helped.
he actually is giving a butt ton to charity at an ever increasing rate, he still has investments though and those investments are currently growing at a faster rate than he can give it away (without actually flushing down the dunny).
why? apart from you being jealous what possible reason is there to impose an artificial limit on what someone is allowed to earn through smart investments? and how would you possibly prevent it? Are you going to start confiscating assets when he hits a certain level?
I am both a PC gamer and a console gamer. you don't have to build a PC for $300, if you are a gamer the money you will save by getting games at considerably cheaper prices easily covers the extra cost of the PC which can then play a much wider and much vaster array of games on. consoles are great for living room but they are definitely not cheaper and you need to get a clue, games on consoles nowadays are just as buggy as PC games, it is a common occurrence to require multi GB patch downloads day one just to make them kinda work.
So it is because no one uses them and not to be anti competitive pricks? yet they will be supported for the foreseeable future on Chrome OS?? Does that mean chrome OS sucks balls so badly it can't survive without this legacy tech to lock users in or are you just spinning more bullshit to justify your anti consumer measures.
embarrassing? Apple pride themselves on copying others well, Xiaomi seems to follow in the same footsteps though with slightly better specs and much better prices. Not sure on their quality as I have never had one but all the reviews are pretty damn good and I am considering one as my next phone.
think the whole summary was written by someone whose knowledge and view of the world probably doesn't extend far beyond what they can see form the back of their pickup.
Nintendo is most definitely obliged to do something about it. Trademark laws require companies to actively protect their trademarks or risk losing rights to them. This isn't rumor or fantasy it is basic trademark requirements. Failure to defend a trademark can be treated as abandonment of said trademark.
until these games are released there is not much they can do apart from warn. It is also not Nintendo's responsibility to seek out everyone that may be thinking about infringing on their IP, it is up to the developer to do there own due diligence or suffer the consequences.
As the historical data is still sitting their I would think their is a whole raft of data still vulnerable so while it may not affect new messages it means everything done previously is still potentially exposed or did they decrypt it all and reencrypt it?
Straw Man. you have to prove they were stolen goods. A thief that just happens to also have a item of the same manufacturer is not a thief and does not need to return the item unless it can be shown it is not his.
If you can't prove you have a case against someone sounds like a pretty fair reason for it to be thrown out. All for screwing over companies that misuse other peoples licenses (commercial or OS) but the onus has to be on those filing the case to prove it.
from the same page.
"The Census and Statistics Act 1905, ensures that Census data is never released in identifiable form, or released to any court, tribunal or other agency. This will not change. No identifiable, private or confidential data will be shared by the ABS with anyone. "
Slashdot Mirror
what do you mean so long to get this to market? it has been in the market for a long time now and is being used by quite a few large companies for various engineering, design and architecture work. Seems so far it is hugely successful though incredibly pricey as each device is multiple thousands of dollars..
when you are talking forensic and proof, circumstantial means it would be shot to pieces in a court room.
That does not prove they removed it from the case, you could do that simply by booting it from a USB key and doing that. They specifically say they can forensically prove the files were copied while it was removed from the computer case.
considering the amount of judges and lawyers that were all just recently rounded up by the government as supposed traitors I can see a shit load of reasons why a judge would comply.
So how exactly do you forensically determine files were copied onto a computer by someone after removing the HDD and then returning it? I am sure that could of happened but how the fuck would you ever tell?
Fukishima suffered from a design flaw not neglect. They simply did not understand the true scale that a large tsunami could reach.
only if you mistreat or neglect her, otherwise she is far more stable and certainly environmentally cleaner than just about any other option currently available.
fucking retard, learning how investments works. If you give away 40 billion (approximately what he has given so far) and earn 60 billion your net worth grows. would take you all of 10 seconds to search on the web to see what he does for charity and the millions of children he has helped.
he actually is giving a butt ton to charity at an ever increasing rate, he still has investments though and those investments are currently growing at a faster rate than he can give it away (without actually flushing down the dunny).
why? apart from you being jealous what possible reason is there to impose an artificial limit on what someone is allowed to earn through smart investments? and how would you possibly prevent it? Are you going to start confiscating assets when he hits a certain level?
1080p to 1440p is a LARGE step. games are struggling to even achieve 1080p on Ps4, to go to 1440p a lot of compromises would have to be made in games.
I am both a PC gamer and a console gamer. you don't have to build a PC for $300, if you are a gamer the money you will save by getting games at considerably cheaper prices easily covers the extra cost of the PC which can then play a much wider and much vaster array of games on. consoles are great for living room but they are definitely not cheaper and you need to get a clue, games on consoles nowadays are just as buggy as PC games, it is a common occurrence to require multi GB patch downloads day one just to make them kinda work.
I don't think anyone counts playstation vita for anything, not even sony.
So it is because no one uses them and not to be anti competitive pricks? yet they will be supported for the foreseeable future on Chrome OS?? Does that mean chrome OS sucks balls so badly it can't survive without this legacy tech to lock users in or are you just spinning more bullshit to justify your anti consumer measures.
embarrassing? Apple pride themselves on copying others well, Xiaomi seems to follow in the same footsteps though with slightly better specs and much better prices. Not sure on their quality as I have never had one but all the reviews are pretty damn good and I am considering one as my next phone.
yeah, it isn't like the US *ever* subsidises US industries causing irreparable harm to foreign manufacturers.
think the whole summary was written by someone whose knowledge and view of the world probably doesn't extend far beyond what they can see form the back of their pickup.
Nintendo is most definitely obliged to do something about it. Trademark laws require companies to actively protect their trademarks or risk losing rights to them. This isn't rumor or fantasy it is basic trademark requirements. Failure to defend a trademark can be treated as abandonment of said trademark.
until these games are released there is not much they can do apart from warn. It is also not Nintendo's responsibility to seek out everyone that may be thinking about infringing on their IP, it is up to the developer to do there own due diligence or suffer the consequences.
A better question is how many of those flaws are intentional as backdoors!
As the historical data is still sitting their I would think their is a whole raft of data still vulnerable so while it may not affect new messages it means everything done previously is still potentially exposed or did they decrypt it all and reencrypt it?
hey I wasn't the one that came up with the stupid analogy, just responding to a blatantly incorrect statement.
Straw Man. you have to prove they were stolen goods. A thief that just happens to also have a item of the same manufacturer is not a thief and does not need to return the item unless it can be shown it is not his.
If you can't prove you have a case against someone sounds like a pretty fair reason for it to be thrown out. All for screwing over companies that misuse other peoples licenses (commercial or OS) but the onus has to be on those filing the case to prove it.
from the same page. "The Census and Statistics Act 1905, ensures that Census data is never released in identifiable form, or released to any court, tribunal or other agency. This will not change. No identifiable, private or confidential data will be shared by the ABS with anyone. "