>Except increasing the demand for and focus on electricity generation.
>But electric cars will hasten the move to more efficient grids, whereas efficient grids may or may >not hasten the move to electric cars.
This is the flawed logic I was talking about in my first post. There is no link between these two statements. There is no link between the number of electric cars on the road and an increased desire for a clean grid.
An increase in the number of electric cars is an increase in electricity demand. An increase in electricty demand will not promote a cleaner grid. It will simply cause more fossil fuels to be burned. Our grid is not operating at capacity. Fossil fuels are cheap. That's why the power companies use them. It's more profitable to simply burn more than to buid a new infrastructure. This is basic economics.
The only way we're going to see a clean grid is from the top down. The economic nature of the USA (Where I'm located. No clue where you are) will require one of two things to happen before a change to a cleaner grid. Either a policy mandate from the group in power or a tech break through that results in clean power being cheaper than dirty power is required. Law or economics.
Ok we're heading to the same place with different routes.
I see it as a much much easier hurdle to overcome - you don't have to invent anything - all the technology necessary to make it happen is available right now. This is why I think spending resources on electric cars is a complete waste. As you say there's nothing to invent. There is however a ton of things to invent for a clean grid. We're decades away from a clean grid. We've had plug in pure electric cars for decades.
If we have electric cars and a dirty grid there's no gain. If we have a clean grid and petro cars there is a gain. Thus directing resources to the grid should be prefered over cars.
You want a car that is powered by something that doesn't exist today. You are completely correct. I want grid then car. You want a car that does nothing to help the environment.
But we need to do something about the cars _now_. Electric cars aren't doing anything _now_. Until we have a clean grid petrol cars and electric cars are both fossil fuel based.
Power plants can be made to run off of nuclear, solar, or wind.
I get so sick of the argument that says, "Well, all you are doing is moving where the fossil fuels are burned". Sure - today. As you admit none of these things are true now. It's a coal powered car.
I agree with you that at some point in the future all of these things may be true. In fact I hope they are true. But what this means is that pure electric cars do nothing but make greens feel smug. At this time promoting electric cars is part of a lifestyle and nothing more. Said promotion could even do harm if people think that electric cars help the environment.
Resources should be directed at converting the power grid to cleaner sources of power. Hydro, kinetic reclimation, solar, nuclear, wind, etc. If we make those changes then we realize benefit from every single device that uses electricity. If we direct resources to electric cars we get nothing. That's the situation - today.
hope to not have to buy a car again for another five years. When the time comes, though, I won't consider any car that doesn't get at least 60 MPG. Hopefully it will be electric instead. Give me a SmartCar that is pluggable, does 100 miles at 70 MPH between overnight charges, and I'm there. I see comments like this a lot but I don't understand them at all. Where do you think the electricity for your car is coming from? How is your power company generating the electricity that you plug the car into? Fossil fuels. Congrats you have a coal powered car.
Hybrids are good. They reclaim energy to increase efficiency. You can drive further with less gas.
Pure electric cars are no different than a standard car.
If it's so good why has it never been implimented? Some variation of this has been suggested for every MMPOG every made. They've all been shot down because it's highly abusable.
If blizzard logs everything then why can't they simply automate the banning process and leave the 10 players out of it? Because the whole concept revolves around something that is subjective. One person's valid play style is another person's harassment. If it violates the EULA there's already a handy way to deal with it.
The appeal process you mention is asking Blizzard to arbitrate any dispute between players. Then you're telling me that won't be a burden on their staff.
All it takes is one group to cancel their account and go rogue. Hundreds are banned before Blizzard can react. I'm sure those people will be ok with being locked out of their accounts while they wait for the problem to be solved.
Hell you'd get guilds who would buy throwaway accounts just to fuck with other guilds.
It was a stupid idea 10 years ago. It's a stupid idea now. It will be a stupid idea 10 years from now.
This is a horrible idea. Guilds routinely have more than 10 people.
Hey guys this guy grabbed my ore spawn. Banned. Hey guys this guy is hunting in my area. Banned. Hey guys this guy is bidding against me in the auction hall. Banned. Hey guys this guy beat me in a duel. Banned. Hey guys I'm bored and reading off names at random. Banned. Hey guys this guy likes a sports team I hate. Banned. Hey guys this guy won the roll on an item I wanted. Banned.
10 people could empty a server before a single appeal could be proccessed. The appeals process would be a crushing burden on the staff. It's impossible to define deliberate abuse.
You can never give a player the ability to deny access of another player to the game. Any such feature will be used violently and will allways generate more trouble than it was ever meant to solve.
That a neat feature and good for theatre but it's obsolete for online voice comms. The feature set of Ventrilo, and I assume team speak, far far surpasses what you've explained.
With Ventrilo anyone with server admin, channel admin too I think, role can mute them. Server admins can also then drag them to another channel and tell them what the problem is.
Also you never need to lock the PTT in the on position in online gaming. If you can't PTT seamlessly while playing you need a new PTT button.
On every Vent server I've used, multiple MMPOG and competititve FPS games, PTT is mandatory. Those that have refused were kicked because it's simply too disruptive.
it argues (quite strictly) that probability is so firmly against the universe ending up the way it is now that some entity (with the individual entity being unspecified) must have taken actions encouraging it to be created as it did (with the actions also being unspecified). That just doesn't make sense. It shows a complete lack of understanding of probability. It's like saying since the odds of the lottery are 1 in whatever hundreds of millions that no one can ever win.
It doesn't matter how bad the probability is. As long as there is a probability higher than 0 the result is possible.
What do you think happens if the dog indicates and the cops find nothing? Do you think that these stats are officially kept anywhere? No, they aren't. This is completely wrong. Do a search on it. Cases are starting to be thrown out due to defense lawyers getting the search ruled illegal due to poor dog records.[1]
They're not scales. It's an induction loop[1]. A car has enough ferrous metal to alter the induction thus triggering the light. I run into this "no change" red light problem with my motorcycle and less sensitive loops. Mostly late at night. If there's other traffic I can pull ahead to let the car behind be get close enough to active the loop. If not I run it.
2. This makes no sense. If your key gets revoked just grab another device do the exact same thing. This will be trivial as absolutely no research is needed. Release the key. This process is significantly cheaper and quicker than revoking the key rendering the whole revocation process pointless unless they do it over a wider range than device.
3. Please explain this quote, from TFA, from Michael Ayers, chairman of the AACS License Administrator, "The device keys associated with the InterVideo player are being deactivated and InterVideo has updated its player," Not key but keys. This quote indicates all InterVideo keys are being deactivated not simply the one used by the cracker.
You don't need to make them revoke all or even a significant portion of the keys. You can cause vest damage to AACS with 1 key revocation. If you can get the key from a highly popular millions of units sold stand alone player and publish it then AACS is in trouble. Then they have to make the hard call of basically bricking millions of devices. Then the government steps in. It would be the best thing for DRM ever.
This is exactly what I was hoping would happen. With the XBOX 360 HD-DVD player cracked, what are they supposed to do? Microsoft will throw their huge weight against any suggestion of revoking the player's keys. And if those keys did get revoked, I think they would have finally gone far enough to see a serious consumer backlash The backlash will range from minor to nothing. One day you will turn on your XOBX 360 and it will said there is a new update ready for the XBOX 360. It will download and install. There are no easily available patch notes when you are in front of the machine. It will have some cool new feature in the dame update like the more informative achievement notification that is already announced. The update will change the keys. The vast majority of 360 owners will never know there was a crack nor that there was a key revocation/replacement.
Then bandwith grew -- 28.8 gave way to 56.6 gave way to 128kbps and then on to broadband -- initially 700kbps or thereabouts, today typically 2-4Mbps in the USA, 5 - 25 mbps in Norway. Just FYI. My broadband provider here in the ~350,000 person metro area in a mostly rural section of the midwest USA doesn't offer anything lower than 3Mbps and will go as high as 10Mbps.
Take this to the next logical step. If these things have value then the game provider is sitting on huge capital assests and/or inventory that the IRS needs to look at.
The end user license agreement is quite clear that nothing in these games is owned by the players. They are simply renting access to them. These bits on a disk have real world value. Thus the game provider is holding huge capital assests. Are they treated as inventory for tax purposes? Can they be depreciated? On what schedule?
Take it one more step. Then what about the list of subscriber info? Those are just bits on a disk but if you've already set the precedent above then these have to be treated the same way. Then any stored data anywhere becomes of interest to the IRS.
So while the University was within their rights I am not as certain that the conviction was valid. I will give an example that might help show why I would be hesitant to accept this type of behavior: so lets say that a bank wants to do the "right thing" and starts searching all its records for odd behavior in their customer's records and reporting them to the police. Would this be a valid action? In the USA banks already do this under the Bank Secrecy Act[1]. So I guess the answer is yes.
My last two hondas went to 187K miles ('86 Accord totaled by a left turn across my lane of traffic accident) and 213K ('89 Accord, Salvaged after something in the radiator system blew. Cheap to moderate repair but I wanted a newer one) Now I have a 2001 accord that I bought at 67K miles. (aka Just past the break in phase) Oh and I still have a running '78 CB750.
Seriously what are you doing to those poor things? Even at 200K miles, treating it like shit, and driving 500 miles a week that poor accord kept going.
Oh and 3K oil changes are a scam. Read your owners manual some time then compare it to what your dealer recommends.
A friend of mine has the same philosophy. While I agree with it in principle, I think in practice it's rather dangerous in today's world. Imagine what a jury is going to be thinking when the prosecution trots out your ISP's traffic logs showing searches on murder methods, police procedures, firearms regulations, evasion techniques, money laundering and corpse disposal, complete with hard copies of a few choice pictures from ogrish or rotten. Regardless of the fact that you run an open AP, most of the jury members are only going to remember all the disturbing things that were searched and viewed from your connection, and believe that even if you didn't perform those searches and view those pages, you must have some implicit connection with those who did. This is not legal advice.
The idea is that a jury never sees any of what you mention above. You never trust a jury to make the right choice. You control what they see and thus allow them to only make one choice. The one you want them to. Your lawyer should be able to get all of this labeled as inadmissible by showing that multiple MAC addresses regularly and routinely connect to your computer. You did keep those logs right? At that point you supeana the computers of everyone in a 500 ft radius and check for matching MAC addresses. Then you search matching computers for evidence of those searches. If you don't have people regularly and routinely connecting to your computer, and the logs to prove it, then your "data communist" defense is motion denied. The jury will see the pics and searches. You will probably go to jail.
Draconian copyright laws are NOT the way to ensure artists rights and promote creative output.
Draconian copyright laws have nothing to do with artists. They were not enacted to help artists in any way. They're purpose is to protect the record labels' revenue stream. A lot of artists don't hold the copyright to their works since they were contracted as work for hire.
So far DRM has fallen into two categories, programs that hijack your computer and encryption. Any CD that uses the autoplay feature to load a program that controls how you use the CD falls into the first category. WoW's warden type program would be another example. You download it dynamicly from the server. It inspects your machine and reports to Blizzard anything you're doing, while WoW is running, that they don't like.
All DVD, HD-DVD, iTunes, and Blu-Ray DRM is encryption. iTunes DRM encrypts the file so only your copy of iTunes and your ipod can decrypt it. DVDs are encrypted and all players are given keys that can decrypt them. You can't just play the file or disk. You must use an approved program. Or you must find the key which is in your memory space at some point.
The problem is the encryption based DRM can't work. It's impossible. It shows a complete and total lack of understanding of how encryption works. It's like locking someone in a house and telling them there is a key hidden inside it. There is a finite amount of space in the house. Either they'll find the key or they'll put a hole through the wall during their search. Either way the DRM is broken.
Slashdot Mirror
>Except increasing the demand for and focus on electricity generation.
>But electric cars will hasten the move to more efficient grids, whereas efficient grids may or may >not hasten the move to electric cars.
This is the flawed logic I was talking about in my first post. There is no link between these two statements. There is no link between the number of electric cars on the road and an increased desire for a clean grid.
An increase in the number of electric cars is an increase in electricity demand. An increase in electricty demand will not promote a cleaner grid. It will simply cause more fossil fuels to be burned. Our grid is not operating at capacity. Fossil fuels are cheap. That's why the power companies use them. It's more profitable to simply burn more than to buid a new infrastructure. This is basic economics.
The only way we're going to see a clean grid is from the top down. The economic nature of the USA (Where I'm located. No clue where you are) will require one of two things to happen before a change to a cleaner grid. Either a policy mandate from the group in power or a tech break through that results in clean power being cheaper than dirty power is required. Law or economics.
If we have electric cars and a dirty grid there's no gain. If we have a clean grid and petro cars there is a gain. Thus directing resources to the grid should be prefered over cars. You want a car that is powered by something that doesn't exist today. You are completely correct. I want grid then car. You want a car that does nothing to help the environment. But we need to do something about the cars _now_. Electric cars aren't doing anything _now_. Until we have a clean grid petrol cars and electric cars are both fossil fuel based.
I get so sick of the argument that says, "Well, all you are doing is moving where the fossil fuels are burned". Sure - today. As you admit none of these things are true now. It's a coal powered car.
I agree with you that at some point in the future all of these things may be true. In fact I hope they are true. But what this means is that pure electric cars do nothing but make greens feel smug. At this time promoting electric cars is part of a lifestyle and nothing more. Said promotion could even do harm if people think that electric cars help the environment.
Resources should be directed at converting the power grid to cleaner sources of power. Hydro, kinetic reclimation, solar, nuclear, wind, etc. If we make those changes then we realize benefit from every single device that uses electricity. If we direct resources to electric cars we get nothing. That's the situation - today.
Hybrids are good. They reclaim energy to increase efficiency. You can drive further with less gas.
Pure electric cars are no different than a standard car.
Bullshit on your bullshit.
If it's so good why has it never been implimented? Some variation of this has been suggested for every MMPOG every made. They've all been shot down because it's highly abusable.
If blizzard logs everything then why can't they simply automate the banning process and leave the 10 players out of it? Because the whole concept revolves around something that is subjective. One person's valid play style is another person's harassment. If it violates the EULA there's already a handy way to deal with it.
The appeal process you mention is asking Blizzard to arbitrate any dispute between players. Then you're telling me that won't be a burden on their staff.
All it takes is one group to cancel their account and go rogue. Hundreds are banned before Blizzard can react. I'm sure those people will be ok with being locked out of their accounts while they wait for the problem to be solved.
Hell you'd get guilds who would buy throwaway accounts just to fuck with other guilds.
It was a stupid idea 10 years ago. It's a stupid idea now. It will be a stupid idea 10 years from now.
This is a horrible idea. Guilds routinely have more than 10 people.
Hey guys this guy grabbed my ore spawn. Banned.
Hey guys this guy is hunting in my area. Banned.
Hey guys this guy is bidding against me in the auction hall. Banned.
Hey guys this guy beat me in a duel. Banned.
Hey guys I'm bored and reading off names at random. Banned.
Hey guys this guy likes a sports team I hate. Banned.
Hey guys this guy won the roll on an item I wanted. Banned.
10 people could empty a server before a single appeal could be proccessed. The appeals process would be a crushing burden on the staff. It's impossible to define deliberate abuse.
You can never give a player the ability to deny access of another player to the game. Any such feature will be used violently and will allways generate more trouble than it was ever meant to solve.
That a neat feature and good for theatre but it's obsolete for online voice comms. The feature set of Ventrilo, and I assume team speak, far far surpasses what you've explained.
With Ventrilo anyone with server admin, channel admin too I think, role can mute them. Server admins can also then drag them to another channel and tell them what the problem is.
Also you never need to lock the PTT in the on position in online gaming. If you can't PTT seamlessly while playing you need a new PTT button.
On every Vent server I've used, multiple MMPOG and competititve FPS games, PTT is mandatory. Those that have refused were kicked because it's simply too disruptive.
It doesn't matter how bad the probability is. As long as there is a probability higher than 0 the result is possible.
[1]http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a3b02d39965b
They're not scales. It's an induction loop[1]. A car has enough ferrous metal to alter the induction thus triggering the light. I run into this "no change" red light problem with my motorcycle and less sensitive loops. Mostly late at night. If there's other traffic I can pull ahead to let the car behind be get close enough to active the loop. If not I run it.
[1]http://auto.howstuffworks.com/question234.htm
It's not laziness. I have no obligation to back up your statements as I didn't make them.
1. Please document your claim.
2. This makes no sense. If your key gets revoked just grab another device do the exact same thing. This will be trivial as absolutely no research is needed. Release the key. This process is significantly cheaper and quicker than revoking the key rendering the whole revocation process pointless unless they do it over a wider range than device.
3. Please explain this quote, from TFA, from Michael Ayers, chairman of the AACS License Administrator, "The device keys associated with the InterVideo player are being deactivated and InterVideo has updated its player," Not key but keys. This quote indicates all InterVideo keys are being deactivated not simply the one used by the cracker.
You don't need to make them revoke all or even a significant portion of the keys. You can cause vest damage to AACS with 1 key revocation. If you can get the key from a highly popular millions of units sold stand alone player and publish it then AACS is in trouble. Then they have to make the hard call of basically bricking millions of devices. Then the government steps in. It would be the best thing for DRM ever.
Take this to the next logical step. If these things have value then the game provider is sitting on huge capital assests and/or inventory that the IRS needs to look at.
The end user license agreement is quite clear that nothing in these games is owned by the players. They are simply renting access to them. These bits on a disk have real world value. Thus the game provider is holding huge capital assests. Are they treated as inventory for tax purposes? Can they be depreciated? On what schedule?
Take it one more step.
Then what about the list of subscriber info? Those are just bits on a disk but if you've already set the precedent above then these have to be treated the same way. Then any stored data anywhere becomes of interest to the IRS.
The end consequences of this are staggering.
[1]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bank_Secrecy_Act
Playing WoW supports the RIAA.
UMG is also Blizzard (both owned by Vivendi) so you have to stop playing WoW.
PEBWAP (Problem exists between wheel and pedal)
My last two hondas went to 187K miles ('86 Accord totaled by a left turn across my lane of traffic accident) and 213K ('89 Accord, Salvaged after something in the radiator system blew. Cheap to moderate repair but I wanted a newer one) Now I have a 2001 accord that I bought at 67K miles. (aka Just past the break in phase) Oh and I still have a running '78 CB750.
Seriously what are you doing to those poor things? Even at 200K miles, treating it like shit, and driving 500 miles a week that poor accord kept going.
Oh and 3K oil changes are a scam. Read your owners manual some time then compare it to what your dealer recommends.
The idea is that a jury never sees any of what you mention above. You never trust a jury to make the right choice. You control what they see and thus allow them to only make one choice. The one you want them to. Your lawyer should be able to get all of this labeled as inadmissible by showing that multiple MAC addresses regularly and routinely connect to your computer. You did keep those logs right? At that point you supeana the computers of everyone in a 500 ft radius and check for matching MAC addresses. Then you search matching computers for evidence of those searches. If you don't have people regularly and routinely connecting to your computer, and the logs to prove it, then your "data communist" defense is motion denied. The jury will see the pics and searches. You will probably go to jail.
Draconian copyright laws are NOT the way to ensure artists rights and promote creative output.
Draconian copyright laws have nothing to do with artists. They were not enacted to help artists in any way. They're purpose is to protect the record labels' revenue stream. A lot of artists don't hold the copyright to their works since they were contracted as work for hire.
So far DRM has fallen into two categories, programs that hijack your computer and encryption. Any CD that uses the autoplay feature to load a program that controls how you use the CD falls into the first category. WoW's warden type program would be another example. You download it dynamicly from the server. It inspects your machine and reports to Blizzard anything you're doing, while WoW is running, that they don't like.
All DVD, HD-DVD, iTunes, and Blu-Ray DRM is encryption. iTunes DRM encrypts the file so only your copy of iTunes and your ipod can decrypt it. DVDs are encrypted and all players are given keys that can decrypt them. You can't just play the file or disk. You must use an approved program. Or you must find the key which is in your memory space at some point.
The problem is the encryption based DRM can't work. It's impossible. It shows a complete and total lack of understanding of how encryption works. It's like locking someone in a house and telling them there is a key hidden inside it. There is a finite amount of space in the house. Either they'll find the key or they'll put a hole through the wall during their search. Either way the DRM is broken.
The first amendment applies to minors. Why do you feel it doesn't?