Google doesn't have to find anything fair use. The only thing they need is to receive a counter notice. With a counter notice, Google can put the video back, and whatever copyright infringement happened or hasn't happened has nothing to do with Google.
She will need to look up the laws in her state but here in Florida the statute of limitations is 5 years for a written contract. This should be easy to make go away.
Maybe for a written contract. But not returning things that you are supposed to return can easily turn into a variation of theft.
Programming 60 real hours in a week is extremely difficult. Try this. Start a timer when you're doing some real work, not goofing off on/. or procrastinating. Trust me, if you can clock 60 real work hours in a week, you'll be mentally exhausted and will have no motivation to do anything for 2 to 3 days.
Quote from a Microsoft manager: "You can make people be in the office for more than 40 hours a week. You can't make them work more than 40 hours a week. "
so let me get this straight. If i am in an interview and i explain to them how well i held up under the pressure of ongoing 60 hour work weeks at my current or previous positions, this does nothing for me to get the next job?
Not if they have any degree of intelligence. The oldest study that I know of by Hans Eysenck in war-time Britain showed that people working 57 hours a week produced less than people working 48 hours a week. That was about people producing weapons, who you would assume would have been very highly motivated. Working over 40 hours a week doesn't achieve anything. Six weeks at 60 hours a week produces the same work as six weeks at 40 hours. Except after working 60 hours for six weeks you are so tired that you can't keep up with the 40 hour worker anymore.
Glancing through the article, there don't seem to be any new dangers to children. There seem to be more things that are _known_ to be dangerous, but these things obviously were dangerous even when we didn't know they were. So no need to panic.
Isn't it quite bad if athletes try to get an advantage to other athletes by having a high-tech company develop suits for them? Isn't it just a fair punishment if these athletes end up in positions below their actual talent and capabilities, when they tried to get in a position above their talent and capabilities?
No. If you have a dick, you're a man. If you "think you're a woman" something is wrong with you and we should try and fix whatever's broken in your head, not cut off your penis and make you "look like you feel."
That's pretty idiotic. Just as an indication how idiotic, even the mullahs in Iran disagree with you. They agree of course that there is something wrong, but like most adults they assume that it is the body that is wrong.
Anyway, if you have a dick and haven't left the stone ages yet, then you are a neanderthal and not a man. I'll think about whether we should try to educate you or whether we should use some generous full-body hair transplant.
Look at how long it took the UK courts to decide that he really should be extradited to Sweden. That too me shows that the UK system kind of works. When he gets over here to Sweden the question of extradition to the US would not be a court matter but a matter for the Foreign Minister and thus could happen in seconds. At least in the UK he has some protection against that.
As far as I know you have some amount of protection when extradited. You can only be taken to court for the crime in the extradition request and if guilty, put to jail for that crime, not for anything else. And you have the right to be returned to where you came from afterwards. So worst case: Be sent to Sweden, go to jail, leave jail, demand to be brought back to the UK, go to court there for skipping bail.
Problem is that it sometimes doesn't work out that way. Programmers are usually "Salary Exempt" in the USA, which means that if your bug breaks something and schedule is suffering, guess what? You fix it but you don't get paid more to do that. Sometimes that means burning the midnight oil during the nights and weekends. The same thing happens if you fall behind schedule. More hours, same pay.
The only problem with that is that everyone except some idiot managers know that working overtime doesn't solve any problems; it creates problems. After more than 40 hours a week concentration suffers, absolute productivity suffers (not just productivity per hour which would be expected, but productivity per week), employees are unhappy, and all that just to stroke the ego of an incompetent manager.
It's fundamental to all of Europe, and a huge freaking problem. Look at Amanda Knox â" interrogated without a lawyer, tried twice for the same crime, and convicted without being present in court. Thank goodness we have the Bill of Rights! Those founders really thinking something good two hundred years ago.
My understanding is that Amanda Knox is a very good looking woman who brutally for no other reason than her own pleasure killed another person. Not being in court when she was convicted was obviously her own decision.
And you will deliver a product with bugs, because -- no matter what you think -- you're not God, just someone with a breathtakingly deluded sense of their own inerrance.
Of course he will deliver a product without bugs. It will just take very, very long time.
Building a wall is in most cases simple, once you have a bit of practice. Building a wall where the bricks start falling out is not of acceptable quality. However, the person building the wall will make mistakes. There will be bugs. There will be bricks not positioned well, there will be bricks with too much or too little mortar. And guess what: The builder fixes these bugs as he sees them, during the time where he is paid by the employer. (I say "in most cases". There will be cases where building a wall is difficult. If there is really bad weather and you need the wall built now, or in unstable ground etc. )
Making bug-free software is hard. Here's the software equivalent in complexity of building a wall: Print the numbers from 1 to 1,000. My solution in C: printf ("1\n"); printf ("2\n"); and so on. In two hours or so I can type 1,000 lines of bug free code without using copy and paste.
The generally acknowledged state-of-the-art method of writing code with a low rate of bugs (not bug free) is good design, code written by competent programmers, serious amount of unit tests that are run repeatedly, serious testing by competent testers (not the programmers), and bug fixing until the rate of bugs is acceptably low. For projects where a very, very low rate of bugs is required, that is achievable, with productivity going down to less than two lines of code per day. That's the state of the art. A programmer should be paid for doing work in state-of-the-art quality.
Now on the other hand your boss is either stupid because he is in the business and doesn't know these very simple facts that I have just written down. Or he is an asshole trying to make you feel bad about the work that you are doing, or probably trying to make you work overtime without payment. Both stupidity and being an asshole are not acceptable quality of managing people, so you should ask him to give his money back to the company.
Also, some airliners (KLM, I'm looking at you), charge you MORE for a single flight than they do for a return flight. When I moved country (and consequently only wanted to book a single), I had to book a return ticket which I simply didn't turn up for, otherwise it would have cost me £500 more. There may be some logic in what KLM is doing, but it feels like a big "fuck you" to me.
I don't know about airlines, but if you do that on one of the Dover-Calais ferries, they state explicitly that if you don't turn up for the return trip, they will charge you the price of the single fare if it is higher. They also charge you more for a one week return ticket than for a one or two day return ticket. Slashdotters would be up in arms and thinking of clever ways to avoid it, but reality is that there's no legal way and no easy illegal way around this.
Right of first sale. I can do whatever the hell I want with my little slip of paper (or do they use cards there now?), and to hell with their "rules".
You can do with your little slip of paper what you like. But it is used as evidence of how far you travelled, and therefore how much you should pay, and if you pay less because you tamper with that evidence, it is fraud. You pay for the journey travelled, the piece of paper is just a device to measure the distance, and you tampered with that measuring device to pay for less than you should.
And, more importanlly, there're people that says you can't change a contract after you paid the bill. If EULAs are contracts, they must adhere to the rules. If EULAs are not contracts, I don't have to comply with it.
There's a misunderstanding here. You _never_ have to comply with a EULA. However, the EULA, especially the letter L = License in it, is what gives you the right to make copies of the software. Like the copy that is installed on your computer, and the copy that is loaded into memory when you run the game. So a EULA that says you can't play the game on fridays you are indirectly forced to comply with it, because without the license you can't play on friday or any other day. If the EULA says that you have to pay a $10,000 fine if you play on friday, you don't have to comply because at most you did some copyright infringement.
I feel that it is a bad ruling. Typically EULAs aren't shown to the user until the purchase has been done. Shit like that should not be tolerated in contract law.
Ignoring the fact that you didn't read or understand the ruling, typical EULAs have to be accepted for the purchase to be completed. Assuming you go to a store the order is either: You hand over the money. You get the DVD. You start the installer. You read and accept the EULA. The contract is done. Then the software gets installed. Or the order is: You hand over the money. You get the DVD. You start the installer. You read and refuse the EULA. You return the DVD to the store. After more or less of a fight, you get your money back. No contract entered. Most companies will have their EULAs readily available on the Internet anyway.
If you are refused your money back, _then_ you can and should complain very loudly. But the fact that you can't read a possibly long EULA in the store is generally accepted. And _if_ you accepted the EULA, then it doesn't really make a difference when you did so.
Valve has the right? Valve does not. Except now in Germany apparently they do. But in the US they are still skirting around the law and the first sale doctrine by using digital locks. Imagine if you had a physical board game that came with a license forbidding you from playing it outside your home, or from regifting it to someone else. But the fans will step forward and defend Steam over this, thinking it's just another form of copy protection.
That's not the situation here. The court ruling didn't say you can't sell the game. The court ruling said that Valve isn't required to let the person who bought the game use their servers.
Let's say you buy a ticket that gives you unlimited entrance to the zoo for one year. After three months visiting the zoo every weekend, you've had enough of seeing animals. There is nothing that stops you from selling the ticket. There is also nothing that can force the zoo to let anyone else but you into the zoo for free with that ticket.
Isn't that a bit of a giveaway, if you write a Trojan and call it OSX/CoinThief? I know there are people out there who think people buying Macs do so because they are too stupid to handle real computers, but nobody could possibly think they are stupid enough to install an app called OSX/CoinThief? Is that how the trojan was found? Someone thought the name is a bit suspicious and started looking?
Writing, reading and arithmetic. Then how do you organize a task, a problem. Define what you have, define the goal, investigate what help you can get from tools/people & then define a plan which might get you to the goal. School doesn't tend to teach how to solve problems or tasks early on, but they can do that.
My personal problem solving algorithm goes like this: Step 1: Find out what you want to achieve. Step 2: Find out how to achieve it. Step 3: Do it. But usually what I observe is the headless chicken algorithm: Step 1: Get all flustered and jump from one argument to the next. Step 2: Go back to Step 1.
could you please clarify what's the problem with gplv3 in the context of gcc ?
a genuine question, i'm not aware of the details in this specific case - it's not like they host modified gcc or something...
Just as an example: Apple uses a compiler _at runtime_ to compile OpenGL and OpenCL to the hardware. They use LLVM for that. If your favourite game is running on MacOS X or iOS, and it uses OpenGL, LLVM is built into the app (or more likely into the graphics driver). _That_ isn't possible with gcc without releasing the whole graphics driver. And that's something Apple doesn't want to do.
Note that with GPL 2 license, what Apple wanted to do was fine. Now it isn't. The problem for gcc is that compiler writers want to feed their families, and companies like Apple have the money to pay compiler writers who want to feed their families. That's why the development happens in Clang+LLVM, and gcc just copies LLVM work. Must be some very satisfying work.
Reading through the comments on the Phoronix website, there seem to be people who really think that Richard Stallman is Jesus. Do they think because Jesus washed his disciples' feet, he didn't wash his own?
But as to which did it first, that was iOS. How do I know? Because iOS was using Skyhook Wireless for location in the very first iPhone. And iPhone launched before any Android devices.
The trick is actually to use both GPS _and_ WiFi. In most places, GPS should be a lot more accurate. Except in towns, where you have (a) huge buildings making GPS suffer, but at the same time (b) lots of WiFi signals so you can probably average out the inaccurate data from them. With a bit of maths you could probably use change in signal strength to improve things if you receive multiple WiFi signals.
Who would use GPS to navigate inside a parking garage?
Not to navigate, hopefully. But in a large parking garage that you don't know well, it would be useful to be able to use GPS to remember where your car is and find it again.
Slashdot Mirror
Google doesn't have to find anything fair use. The only thing they need is to receive a counter notice. With a counter notice, Google can put the video back, and whatever copyright infringement happened or hasn't happened has nothing to do with Google.
She will need to look up the laws in her state but here in Florida the statute of limitations is 5 years for a written contract. This should be easy to make go away.
Maybe for a written contract. But not returning things that you are supposed to return can easily turn into a variation of theft.
Because you don't have to pay patent royalties to use it.
Never paid any patent royalties for h.264.
Programming 60 real hours in a week is extremely difficult. Try this. Start a timer when you're doing some real work, not goofing off on /. or procrastinating. Trust me, if you can clock 60 real work hours in a week, you'll be mentally exhausted and will have no motivation to do anything for 2 to 3 days.
Quote from a Microsoft manager: "You can make people be in the office for more than 40 hours a week. You can't make them work more than 40 hours a week. "
so let me get this straight. If i am in an interview and i explain to them how well i held up under the pressure of ongoing 60 hour work weeks at my current or previous positions, this does nothing for me to get the next job?
Not if they have any degree of intelligence. The oldest study that I know of by Hans Eysenck in war-time Britain showed that people working 57 hours a week produced less than people working 48 hours a week. That was about people producing weapons, who you would assume would have been very highly motivated. Working over 40 hours a week doesn't achieve anything. Six weeks at 60 hours a week produces the same work as six weeks at 40 hours. Except after working 60 hours for six weeks you are so tired that you can't keep up with the 40 hour worker anymore.
Glancing through the article, there don't seem to be any new dangers to children. There seem to be more things that are _known_ to be dangerous, but these things obviously were dangerous even when we didn't know they were. So no need to panic.
Isn't it quite bad if athletes try to get an advantage to other athletes by having a high-tech company develop suits for them? Isn't it just a fair punishment if these athletes end up in positions below their actual talent and capabilities, when they tried to get in a position above their talent and capabilities?
No. If you have a dick, you're a man. If you "think you're a woman" something is wrong with you and we should try and fix whatever's broken in your head, not cut off your penis and make you "look like you feel."
That's pretty idiotic. Just as an indication how idiotic, even the mullahs in Iran disagree with you. They agree of course that there is something wrong, but like most adults they assume that it is the body that is wrong.
Anyway, if you have a dick and haven't left the stone ages yet, then you are a neanderthal and not a man. I'll think about whether we should try to educate you or whether we should use some generous full-body hair transplant.
Bigender, I'm not sure of. Maybe someone who is comfortable switching gender roles in a culture with 2 or more genders. (Some cultures have several)
Bigender: Opposite of Littleender. Main political parties in Liliput.
Look at how long it took the UK courts to decide that he really should be extradited to Sweden. That too me shows that the UK system kind of works. When he gets over here to Sweden the question of extradition to the US would not be a court matter but a matter for the Foreign Minister and thus could happen in seconds. At least in the UK he has some protection against that.
As far as I know you have some amount of protection when extradited. You can only be taken to court for the crime in the extradition request and if guilty, put to jail for that crime, not for anything else. And you have the right to be returned to where you came from afterwards. So worst case: Be sent to Sweden, go to jail, leave jail, demand to be brought back to the UK, go to court there for skipping bail.
Problem is that it sometimes doesn't work out that way. Programmers are usually "Salary Exempt" in the USA, which means that if your bug breaks something and schedule is suffering, guess what? You fix it but you don't get paid more to do that. Sometimes that means burning the midnight oil during the nights and weekends. The same thing happens if you fall behind schedule. More hours, same pay.
The only problem with that is that everyone except some idiot managers know that working overtime doesn't solve any problems; it creates problems. After more than 40 hours a week concentration suffers, absolute productivity suffers (not just productivity per hour which would be expected, but productivity per week), employees are unhappy, and all that just to stroke the ego of an incompetent manager.
It's fundamental to all of Europe, and a huge freaking problem. Look at Amanda Knox â" interrogated without a lawyer, tried twice for the same crime, and convicted without being present in court. Thank goodness we have the Bill of Rights! Those founders really thinking something good two hundred years ago.
My understanding is that Amanda Knox is a very good looking woman who brutally for no other reason than her own pleasure killed another person. Not being in court when she was convicted was obviously her own decision.
And you will deliver a product with bugs, because -- no matter what you think -- you're not God, just someone with a breathtakingly deluded sense of their own inerrance.
Of course he will deliver a product without bugs. It will just take very, very long time.
Building a wall is in most cases simple, once you have a bit of practice. Building a wall where the bricks start falling out is not of acceptable quality. However, the person building the wall will make mistakes. There will be bugs. There will be bricks not positioned well, there will be bricks with too much or too little mortar. And guess what: The builder fixes these bugs as he sees them, during the time where he is paid by the employer. (I say "in most cases". There will be cases where building a wall is difficult. If there is really bad weather and you need the wall built now, or in unstable ground etc. )
Making bug-free software is hard. Here's the software equivalent in complexity of building a wall: Print the numbers from 1 to 1,000. My solution in C: printf ("1\n"); printf ("2\n"); and so on. In two hours or so I can type 1,000 lines of bug free code without using copy and paste.
The generally acknowledged state-of-the-art method of writing code with a low rate of bugs (not bug free) is good design, code written by competent programmers, serious amount of unit tests that are run repeatedly, serious testing by competent testers (not the programmers), and bug fixing until the rate of bugs is acceptably low. For projects where a very, very low rate of bugs is required, that is achievable, with productivity going down to less than two lines of code per day. That's the state of the art. A programmer should be paid for doing work in state-of-the-art quality.
Now on the other hand your boss is either stupid because he is in the business and doesn't know these very simple facts that I have just written down. Or he is an asshole trying to make you feel bad about the work that you are doing, or probably trying to make you work overtime without payment. Both stupidity and being an asshole are not acceptable quality of managing people, so you should ask him to give his money back to the company.
Also, some airliners (KLM, I'm looking at you), charge you MORE for a single flight than they do for a return flight. When I moved country (and consequently only wanted to book a single), I had to book a return ticket which I simply didn't turn up for, otherwise it would have cost me £500 more. There may be some logic in what KLM is doing, but it feels like a big "fuck you" to me.
I don't know about airlines, but if you do that on one of the Dover-Calais ferries, they state explicitly that if you don't turn up for the return trip, they will charge you the price of the single fare if it is higher. They also charge you more for a one week return ticket than for a one or two day return ticket. Slashdotters would be up in arms and thinking of clever ways to avoid it, but reality is that there's no legal way and no easy illegal way around this.
Right of first sale. I can do whatever the hell I want with my little slip of paper (or do they use cards there now?), and to hell with their "rules".
You can do with your little slip of paper what you like. But it is used as evidence of how far you travelled, and therefore how much you should pay, and if you pay less because you tamper with that evidence, it is fraud. You pay for the journey travelled, the piece of paper is just a device to measure the distance, and you tampered with that measuring device to pay for less than you should.
And, more importanlly, there're people that says you can't change a contract after you paid the bill. If EULAs are contracts, they must adhere to the rules. If EULAs are not contracts, I don't have to comply with it.
There's a misunderstanding here. You _never_ have to comply with a EULA. However, the EULA, especially the letter L = License in it, is what gives you the right to make copies of the software. Like the copy that is installed on your computer, and the copy that is loaded into memory when you run the game. So a EULA that says you can't play the game on fridays you are indirectly forced to comply with it, because without the license you can't play on friday or any other day. If the EULA says that you have to pay a $10,000 fine if you play on friday, you don't have to comply because at most you did some copyright infringement.
I feel that it is a bad ruling. Typically EULAs aren't shown to the user until the purchase has been done. Shit like that should not be tolerated in contract law.
Ignoring the fact that you didn't read or understand the ruling, typical EULAs have to be accepted for the purchase to be completed. Assuming you go to a store the order is either: You hand over the money. You get the DVD. You start the installer. You read and accept the EULA. The contract is done. Then the software gets installed. Or the order is: You hand over the money. You get the DVD. You start the installer. You read and refuse the EULA. You return the DVD to the store. After more or less of a fight, you get your money back. No contract entered. Most companies will have their EULAs readily available on the Internet anyway.
If you are refused your money back, _then_ you can and should complain very loudly. But the fact that you can't read a possibly long EULA in the store is generally accepted. And _if_ you accepted the EULA, then it doesn't really make a difference when you did so.
Valve has the right? Valve does not. Except now in Germany apparently they do. But in the US they are still skirting around the law and the first sale doctrine by using digital locks. Imagine if you had a physical board game that came with a license forbidding you from playing it outside your home, or from regifting it to someone else. But the fans will step forward and defend Steam over this, thinking it's just another form of copy protection.
That's not the situation here. The court ruling didn't say you can't sell the game. The court ruling said that Valve isn't required to let the person who bought the game use their servers.
Let's say you buy a ticket that gives you unlimited entrance to the zoo for one year. After three months visiting the zoo every weekend, you've had enough of seeing animals. There is nothing that stops you from selling the ticket. There is also nothing that can force the zoo to let anyone else but you into the zoo for free with that ticket.
Isn't that a bit of a giveaway, if you write a Trojan and call it OSX/CoinThief? I know there are people out there who think people buying Macs do so because they are too stupid to handle real computers, but nobody could possibly think they are stupid enough to install an app called OSX/CoinThief? Is that how the trojan was found? Someone thought the name is a bit suspicious and started looking?
Writing, reading and arithmetic. Then how do you organize a task, a problem. Define what you have, define the goal, investigate what help you can get from tools/people & then define a plan which might get you to the goal. School doesn't tend to teach how to solve problems or tasks early on, but they can do that.
My personal problem solving algorithm goes like this: Step 1: Find out what you want to achieve. Step 2: Find out how to achieve it. Step 3: Do it. But usually what I observe is the headless chicken algorithm: Step 1: Get all flustered and jump from one argument to the next. Step 2: Go back to Step 1.
could you please clarify what's the problem with gplv3 in the context of gcc ?
a genuine question, i'm not aware of the details in this specific case - it's not like they host modified gcc or something...
Just as an example: Apple uses a compiler _at runtime_ to compile OpenGL and OpenCL to the hardware. They use LLVM for that. If your favourite game is running on MacOS X or iOS, and it uses OpenGL, LLVM is built into the app (or more likely into the graphics driver). _That_ isn't possible with gcc without releasing the whole graphics driver. And that's something Apple doesn't want to do.
Note that with GPL 2 license, what Apple wanted to do was fine. Now it isn't. The problem for gcc is that compiler writers want to feed their families, and companies like Apple have the money to pay compiler writers who want to feed their families. That's why the development happens in Clang+LLVM, and gcc just copies LLVM work. Must be some very satisfying work.
Reading through the comments on the Phoronix website, there seem to be people who really think that Richard Stallman is Jesus. Do they think because Jesus washed his disciples' feet, he didn't wash his own?
But as to which did it first, that was iOS. How do I know? Because iOS was using Skyhook Wireless for location in the very first iPhone. And iPhone launched before any Android devices.
The trick is actually to use both GPS _and_ WiFi. In most places, GPS should be a lot more accurate. Except in towns, where you have (a) huge buildings making GPS suffer, but at the same time (b) lots of WiFi signals so you can probably average out the inaccurate data from them. With a bit of maths you could probably use change in signal strength to improve things if you receive multiple WiFi signals.
Who would use GPS to navigate inside a parking garage?
Not to navigate, hopefully. But in a large parking garage that you don't know well, it would be useful to be able to use GPS to remember where your car is and find it again.