3) Offer different plans at different prices for different users. People use a lot of their product and the only thought that comes to your mind is "punish them"?
You use terms such as "overuse" and "breaking the pricing model". The users bought an unlimited connection at a given price. Why blame them? Also, how do you know Virgin has any problems with profitability? This only cuts their costs without losing many customers. This is the smart thing to do for them regardless of their profits.
Obviously, they paid 2.5M for the lawyers. If this was budgeted from the start it explains why the figure "randomly" ended up being exactly 5% of the total set aside. This means the plaintiff's lawyers simply accepted the 47.5M the labels had set aside.
You missed the obvious question: How on earth did the damages end up within 5% of what they had set aside? Using the per infringement figure, they set aside $167 and paid $158 when the statuatory damages range from $750 to $150,000? Wtf is going on here?
Then again, a lot of it is written in COBOL, as the article states.
Yes, and upgrading legacy code to become a modern data center is hard. Why, I remember how I struggled to turn a simple Pascal Hello World into a cafeteria. Can you believe there's no open source tool to translate for loops into pretzels?
However, the CRTC isn't forcing Bell to offer access to the highest speeds of service, isn't preventing them from throttling the BitTorrent (et al) traffic from customers of third parties (e.g. TekSavvy), and is now allowing them to impose 60GB bandwidth caps on third party customers with big fees for going over.
This is absurd. If they are required sell bandwidth to other companies at a given price, how are they allowed to impose limits and extra fees for individual customers of the other companies that have absolutely no contract with Bell directly? Assuming they are legally required to sell TekSavvy bandwidth at price x, how can they invent random rules that lets them bill more than price x? Has the CRTC explicitly given Bell permission to do this stuff?
I realize no one reads TFA; not even the submitter did. I don't know which is more absurd, the submitter claiming the above is not in TFA or someone ignoring TFA, reading the wiki page, then linking TFA as the source of Moore's Law without realizing it's TFA!
Every time someone complains that everything is assumed to be American on Slashdot, you get a link to this. So, in short, you are american whether you like it or not.
At least some of those are because quantum decoherence happens faster when temperature rises. The time before quantum behavior turns into normal classical behavior is inversely proportional to temperature in Kelvin. (I tried to find something sane on Wikipedia, but all relevant articles seem to be written for experts...)
A more general explanation could be that new stuff happens at very low energies and very high energies compared to what we're used to. Cold is just low energy.
I haven't read Woit's post on this, but the whole idea that some guy who has for years claimed that string theory is "not even wrong" because it can't make any predictions suddenly changes his mind to say it predicted the Planck scale is below 3,5TeV is absurd.
Some Randall-Sundrum models might have been falsified, but I don't know enough to say whether they are part of string theory or not.
As I see it, the Higgs could fit into one of two energy ranges:
1. A range that the limited LHC and Fermilab can both probe now, with the LHC having some advantage.
2. A range that only the full LHC can reach.
If it falls into the latter, then nobody is discovering the Higgs for a few years until they get the LHC in gear. If it falls into #1, does it REALLY matter that much who finds it first?
Only the 180 - maybe 190 GeV range is allowed but outside the Tevatron's reach energy-wise. The LHC and Tevatron aren't redundant, though. Any signal seen by both can be combined for more certainty.
Upgrading the LHC from 7 to 14 TeV doesn't really help find the Higgs.
Also, who knows what other interesting physics we'll find at the higher LHC design energies, that we're just pushing off for years sticking where we are at now?
I don't know what the odds of not seeing SUSY at 7 TeV but seeing it at 14 are, but I don't think they're that great. If SUSY exists at the electroweak scale, at least some of the particles should be seen at 7 TeV. OTOH, colliding at 14 TeV should make it easier (faster) to see new particles, even if they are around 1 TeV. Dunno what the arguments for and against running a year more before the upgrade have really been.
A few years, maybe 3-5, should be enough to rule out the Higgs over the entire range of masses it could have. From what I gather, since the percentages of some processes no longer add up to 100 at LHC energies, something has to be there. It's theoretically possible this something could be heavy enough and hard enough to see that the LHC wouldn't find it, but no actual models predict anything that would be invisible at the LHC.
a) Temporal ordering is for the time period of the last two centuries and the degree of CO2 increase during that time. The curve you linked to spans 2000 times as long, with Milankovitch cycles causing temperature variations roughly ten times the ones we observe now but over a hundred times slower. These cycles are caused by differences in warming by sunlight (caused by variation in the Earth's orbit), so you get warming -> more CO2 -> more warming through positive feedback. In contrast, just adding CO2, you get more CO2 -> more warming.
b) If you look at the peaks in the curve you linked, the peak in CO2 actually precedes a peak in temperature. (Use another window as a ruler) Note that time goes from left to right.
One could argue that between the purchase and the resale that he was the owner of the device and thus was covered, but let's keep perspective - Majed wasn't convicted for rooting his Droid, he was running a business on a technicality, and a stretched one at that.
(3) Computer programs, in the form of firmware or software, that enable used wireless telephone handsets to connect to a wireless telecommunications network, when circumvention is initiated by the owner of the copy of the computer program solely in order to connect to a wireless telecommunications network and access to the network is authorized by the operator of the network.
I don't see how the fact that he was the owner of the phones is a technicality or a stretch in any way. He wasn't hacking someone else's phone; he was hacking phones he owned so they could connect to another network. Would it be legal in your opinion if he resold the phones as-is and the end user "initiated the circumvention" by asking him to do it? Is it illegal in the US to make a business out of doing something you're legally allowed to do?
It's legal to jailbreak your own "used" phone. This guy was jailbreaking phones by the thousands and selling them. It's still legal to jailbreak the phone you own and use, it's just illegal to unlock and sell in bulk.
Is it illegal to jailbreak a phone if you haven't used it? Illegal to jailbreak more than one phone? Illegal to sell a phone after you jailbreak it? Illegal only if two or more of the above?
I think you have a case of the ole "illegal to profit from someone else's work" mindset.
One woman said Assange ignored her appeals to stop when the condom broke
Unless there have been new interviews with the women, no one's said anything about ignoring appeals to stop. With one of the women the condom broke and the woman accuses him of doing it on purpose. With the other they had sex without a condom.
If he had "ignored appeals to stop" the case would be clear-cut rape and the prosecutors wouldn't have been changing their minds like this.
When it all collapse and catch fire, they'll blame big oil for sabotaging it and push some new flavour of disaster.
Yeah, because if those hippies buy too many of my widgets I'll obviously need a government bailout or my widgets will catch fire! Didn't we learn anything from the great Coca-Cola explosion of 1924? Successful companies need government money or the hippies will burn!
as various media outlets have reported "the basis for the rape charge" purely seems to constitute a post-facto dispute over consensual, but unprotected sex days after the event. Both women have declared that they had consensual sexual relations with our client and that they continued to instigate friendly contact well after the alleged incidents. Only after the women became aware of each other's relationships with Mr. Assange did they make their allegations against him.
But, if you give me your itinerary every time you fly, I'll be at the airport with you and we can make sure it's very pleasant for you.
What on earth does this mean? Some TSA PR woman offers to follow him around to make sure the other TSA goons don't molest him? Or was this said in a seductive tone of voice?
Slashdot Mirror
I assume it's way past the size limit for creating a black hole when it goes supernova. Would it be the closest black hole to us?
, I could google it or look it up on Wikipedia, but to be honest, I don't enough to do so.
you apparantly don't even ' ' enough to bother to write ' ' in your post.
Perhaps he accidentally the whole thing?
I have a Scorpio tattoo, you insensitive clod!
3) Offer different plans at different prices for different users. People use a lot of their product and the only thought that comes to your mind is "punish them"?
You use terms such as "overuse" and "breaking the pricing model". The users bought an unlimited connection at a given price. Why blame them? Also, how do you know Virgin has any problems with profitability? This only cuts their costs without losing many customers. This is the smart thing to do for them regardless of their profits.
Obviously, they paid 2.5M for the lawyers. If this was budgeted from the start it explains why the figure "randomly" ended up being exactly 5% of the total set aside. This means the plaintiff's lawyers simply accepted the 47.5M the labels had set aside.
You missed the obvious question: How on earth did the damages end up within 5% of what they had set aside? Using the per infringement figure, they set aside $167 and paid $158 when the statuatory damages range from $750 to $150,000? Wtf is going on here?
Then again, a lot of it is written in COBOL, as the article states.
Yes, and upgrading legacy code to become a modern data center is hard. Why, I remember how I struggled to turn a simple Pascal Hello World into a cafeteria. Can you believe there's no open source tool to translate for loops into pretzels?
Hint: It's a building. With computers. And data.
However, the CRTC isn't forcing Bell to offer access to the highest speeds of service, isn't preventing them from throttling the BitTorrent (et al) traffic from customers of third parties (e.g. TekSavvy), and is now allowing them to impose 60GB bandwidth caps on third party customers with big fees for going over.
This is absurd. If they are required sell bandwidth to other companies at a given price, how are they allowed to impose limits and extra fees for individual customers of the other companies that have absolutely no contract with Bell directly? Assuming they are legally required to sell TekSavvy bandwidth at price x, how can they invent random rules that lets them bill more than price x? Has the CRTC explicitly given Bell permission to do this stuff?
I realize no one reads TFA; not even the submitter did. I don't know which is more absurd, the submitter claiming the above is not in TFA or someone ignoring TFA, reading the wiki page, then linking TFA as the source of Moore's Law without realizing it's TFA!
Head explodes
Top ten lists are so 2010.
Every time someone complains that everything is assumed to be American on Slashdot, you get a link to this. So, in short, you are american whether you like it or not.
The world of minecraft is complex enough to be Turing complete.
Prove it. No, really, that would be pretty interesting :)
At least some of those are because quantum decoherence happens faster when temperature rises. The time before quantum behavior turns into normal classical behavior is inversely proportional to temperature in Kelvin. (I tried to find something sane on Wikipedia, but all relevant articles seem to be written for experts...)
A more general explanation could be that new stuff happens at very low energies and very high energies compared to what we're used to. Cold is just low energy.
I haven't read Woit's post on this, but the whole idea that some guy who has for years claimed that string theory is "not even wrong" because it can't make any predictions suddenly changes his mind to say it predicted the Planck scale is below 3,5TeV is absurd.
Some Randall-Sundrum models might have been falsified, but I don't know enough to say whether they are part of string theory or not.
Currently excluded
Tevatron sensitivity, slide 18
Only the 180 - maybe 190 GeV range is allowed but outside the Tevatron's reach energy-wise. The LHC and Tevatron aren't redundant, though. Any signal seen by both can be combined for more certainty.
Upgrading the LHC from 7 to 14 TeV doesn't really help find the Higgs.
I don't know what the odds of not seeing SUSY at 7 TeV but seeing it at 14 are, but I don't think they're that great. If SUSY exists at the electroweak scale, at least some of the particles should be seen at 7 TeV. OTOH, colliding at 14 TeV should make it easier (faster) to see new particles, even if they are around 1 TeV. Dunno what the arguments for and against running a year more before the upgrade have really been.
A few years, maybe 3-5, should be enough to rule out the Higgs over the entire range of masses it could have. From what I gather, since the percentages of some processes no longer add up to 100 at LHC energies, something has to be there. It's theoretically possible this something could be heavy enough and hard enough to see that the LHC wouldn't find it, but no actual models predict anything that would be invisible at the LHC.
a) Temporal ordering is for the time period of the last two centuries and the degree of CO2 increase during that time. The curve you linked to spans 2000 times as long, with Milankovitch cycles causing temperature variations roughly ten times the ones we observe now but over a hundred times slower. These cycles are caused by differences in warming by sunlight (caused by variation in the Earth's orbit), so you get warming -> more CO2 -> more warming through positive feedback. In contrast, just adding CO2, you get more CO2 -> more warming.
b) If you look at the peaks in the curve you linked, the peak in CO2 actually precedes a peak in temperature. (Use another window as a ruler) Note that time goes from left to right.
Rulemaking on Exemptions from Prohibition on Circumvention of Technological Measures that Control Access to Copyrighted Works
I don't see how the fact that he was the owner of the phones is a technicality or a stretch in any way. He wasn't hacking someone else's phone; he was hacking phones he owned so they could connect to another network. Would it be legal in your opinion if he resold the phones as-is and the end user "initiated the circumvention" by asking him to do it? Is it illegal in the US to make a business out of doing something you're legally allowed to do?
Is it illegal to jailbreak a phone if you haven't used it? Illegal to jailbreak more than one phone? Illegal to sell a phone after you jailbreak it? Illegal only if two or more of the above?
I think you have a case of the ole "illegal to profit from someone else's work" mindset.
Unless there have been new interviews with the women, no one's said anything about ignoring appeals to stop. With one of the women the condom broke and the woman accuses him of doing it on purpose. With the other they had sex without a condom.
If he had "ignored appeals to stop" the case would be clear-cut rape and the prosecutors wouldn't have been changing their minds like this.
rocks
Yeah, because if those hippies buy too many of my widgets I'll obviously need a government bailout or my widgets will catch fire! Didn't we learn anything from the great Coca-Cola explosion of 1924? Successful companies need government money or the hippies will burn!
click
What on earth does this mean? Some TSA PR woman offers to follow him around to make sure the other TSA goons don't molest him? Or was this said in a seductive tone of voice?