Hell, the average telephone exchange, if you nuked everything around it, would be giving dialtone and DSL to the skeletons for at least a week, probably more depending on how much diesel is in the tanks.
During the northeast blackout of '03, all of the utilities went out. Street lights, traffic signals, all went dark. Cell phone towers went out. There wasn't enough water pressure beyond 5 stories. There was gas, but no starter. But there was still a dialtone through the landline. And we could still make calls out, if our phone didn't require an external power source. Most of the handsets we use are cordless, but we have several of the simpler phones lying around for such emergencies.
Do you seriously go to the DP Review forums? Nobody whines about MP. In fact, most photographres using P&S cameras would like theirs capped at 6MP.
But that's because they're mostly serious photographers, who are interested in printing their photos, not in storing them on a disk and pixel-peeping occasionally through a monitor. And there is both a physical limit with prints, and a physical limit with sensors. 6MP, most people on those forum seems to agree, is the sweet spot for a small (> 1/1.6") sensor.
Marriage exists in every culture. It has existed since around the time humans migrated out of Africa, as marriage was already practiced throughout tribal Africa prior to any European influence. The idea isn't uniform between different cultures, but its core principle remains the same:
You're only allowed to have sex with the person(s) to whom you're married.
That's the cultural and historical definition of marriage. Any extra fluff is exactly that--extra fluff.
Nullification, on the other hand, varies greatly by society. It's partly because while marriage is something that predates any organized religion, people haven't actually been surviving long enough to want to nullify their marriage until the past five hundred years.
Every dialect has its own set of puns, and interchangability between dialects varies with the pun. And on top of that, Cantonese, in particular, the Hong Kong version, has a completely different set of colloquialisms.
For example, this pun doesn't work with Cantonese. There aren't just more tones in Cantonese, but more beginning and ending consonants. In Cantonese, the phrase in question sounds like "Cho Nai Ma" while "fuck your mother" is "Cou Nay Ma."
Besides, the Cantonese slang for "fuck" doesn't actually exist as a word. The old word used in this pun has since been sanitized (maybe due to British influence in Hong Kong) over time to mean "to court" or "to pick up."
One pun I've heard bandied about occasionally in the US is "delay no more." It has a passing resemblance to "fuck your mother" in the Toisan dialect of Cantonese. Since the majority of the immigrants to the US were from Toisan or from the Seiyap area, and very few of them spoke English, most of them would automatically assume the Chinese meaning upon hearing the phrase. The pun doesn't work as well with Hong Kong Cantonese though.
Companies certainly don't have the right to make money off their products. In the case of Microsoft, they should stop making the product that does not make them money (which they did) or put better locks on their product (which they did). So as much as it pains me to say it, Microsoft did the non-evil thing.
If the Kindle is too expensive without subsidies, and subsidies are impossible because it is too easy to crack, maybe it's not the Kindle's time yet. Maybe Amazon made a bad business decision by bringing it out this early. The point is, we shouldn't lose our property rights just because some famous people make a poor business decision.
I'm not saying people should drive companies out of business. But the current system as it exists isn't capitalism anymore, it's corporate socialism. And that's the antithesis to individual freedom (as in libre).
But it still sounds real. Instead of sounding flat or somehow otherwise lacking like MP3's sound.
I mean, our brains can interpolate the missing pieces, and unless we listen very carefully, we really can't consciously tell the difference between a mid-quality recording and a high-quality recording, or a high-quality recording and a live performance. But from personal experience (and hence from a personal perspective), listening to music at a concert hall in a real performance puts me in a different mood than listening to a recording. Even if it was a recording playing in the background and the musicians were just doing the motions, I might not be able to say immediately what was wrong, but I would come out slightly upset.
I would argue that North Korea is the world's largest military threat. They have what, the fourth largest standing army in the world, and a crazy, unpredictable dictator giving commands. The only somewhat ally North Korea has is China, and describing that relationship as an alliance is a bit of a stretch.
China isn't looking to start a war. Its interested in stability. North Korea, on the other hand, may very well be looking for the right excuse to internally justify war.
And considering the complexity, it might be fine to keep it as a trade secret.
Of course, Intel wouldn't risk having their innovations copied, so they'd most likely patent their stuff at or near when they're about to release their product.
It has always puzzled me how some Americans can double-think on such a grand scale when talking about Tibet: almost the entire area of the US was taken by outright theft, swindle or larceny.
People, especially those of the television-fed generation, are afflicted with this mental condition that renders them unable to hold any opinions contrary to what they're fed by the television.
Sometimes, I wish teenagers would put their rebellious nature to good use, instead of wasting it on the insignificant things like staying out late or having sex. Problem is, by the time they get around to maturing enough to care about the bigger issues, they're too old to rebel against the group think.
DRM has nothing to do with copyright. Rejection of the GPL is a copyright matter. Rejection of DRM is not.
DRM's advertised purpose may be to prevent unlicensed distribution and unlicensed derived works. But call it collateral damage, or call it DRM's real, more sinister purpose, it prevents people from using the product they purchased as they see fit.
It's very common for people to bring up DRM preventing fair use as justification for why it is wrong. However, fair use is just the low hanging fruit. DRM takes away far more user rights, consumer rights, ownership rights that are far more obscure and probably not as accessible to anybody but students of philosophy of law.
To enumereate a few:
-The right to resell, to gift, and to inherit. -The right to disseminate and modify. -The right to destroy. -The right to use for purposes other than intended.
These are all property rights, not copy rights. Property rights are inherent to any good, and secured by the 4th and the 14th amendments. Copy rights don't exist for anyone other than the creator to begin with, but can be granted to others at the discretion of the creator. See how they are completely unrelated?
The fact of the matter is, DRM creates a paradigm wherein the user is no longer an owner, but a licensor. And that is a very dangerous slippery slope that was started by software licenses (EULA). The idea that you don't own something you bought and paid for, that you are merely licensing it from the creator, implies that you have no property rights except what said creator grants you. And that, I would argue, is a form of slavery.
But that's a false dichotomy. It's never a choice purely between your family or somebody else's family. There are ways to keep both families alive. It's a matter of being willing to compromise.
The US doesn't compromise with anybody it deems a terrorist organization, which is where said dichotomy comes from. But that kind of hard-line for-us-or-against-us all-or-nothing stance is exactly what gets people into trouble, and is completely unnecessary. I'm not saying appease the terrorists. But if you know the answer before asking the question, then there never was a need to ask the question. In the same way, if you don't even approach a conflict with the "let's try to work something out" mentality, then a compromise just won't happen.
Slashdot Mirror
Seriously? Google has somebody to verify that those sites are indeed appropriately placed on the list? Isn't that against the law?
Or are they just taking the list for granted?
In any case, shouldn't all of our search results show that certain results have been filtered out?
Hell, the average telephone exchange, if you nuked everything around it, would be giving dialtone and DSL to the skeletons for at least a week, probably more depending on how much diesel is in the tanks.
During the northeast blackout of '03, all of the utilities went out. Street lights, traffic signals, all went dark. Cell phone towers went out. There wasn't enough water pressure beyond 5 stories. There was gas, but no starter. But there was still a dialtone through the landline. And we could still make calls out, if our phone didn't require an external power source. Most of the handsets we use are cordless, but we have several of the simpler phones lying around for such emergencies.
Do you seriously go to the DP Review forums? Nobody whines about MP. In fact, most photographres using P&S cameras would like theirs capped at 6MP.
But that's because they're mostly serious photographers, who are interested in printing their photos, not in storing them on a disk and pixel-peeping occasionally through a monitor. And there is both a physical limit with prints, and a physical limit with sensors. 6MP, most people on those forum seems to agree, is the sweet spot for a small (> 1/1.6") sensor.
They could've just rebranded SFC or something along those lines.
Those same policies also created the massive adjustment we're seeing now.
I guess since you're only looking at the prosperity of the 90's and 00's, you're among those, trade short-term pleasure for long-term pain types.
Nobody is ever at a loss for clever thing to say.
Reading /. reinforces this idea as well.
Marriage exists in every culture. It has existed since around the time humans migrated out of Africa, as marriage was already practiced throughout tribal Africa prior to any European influence. The idea isn't uniform between different cultures, but its core principle remains the same:
You're only allowed to have sex with the person(s) to whom you're married.
That's the cultural and historical definition of marriage. Any extra fluff is exactly that--extra fluff.
Nullification, on the other hand, varies greatly by society. It's partly because while marriage is something that predates any organized religion, people haven't actually been surviving long enough to want to nullify their marriage until the past five hundred years.
Do not eat. Battery not safe for consumption.
Every dialect has its own set of puns, and interchangability between dialects varies with the pun. And on top of that, Cantonese, in particular, the Hong Kong version, has a completely different set of colloquialisms.
For example, this pun doesn't work with Cantonese. There aren't just more tones in Cantonese, but more beginning and ending consonants. In Cantonese, the phrase in question sounds like "Cho Nai Ma" while "fuck your mother" is "Cou Nay Ma."
Besides, the Cantonese slang for "fuck" doesn't actually exist as a word. The old word used in this pun has since been sanitized (maybe due to British influence in Hong Kong) over time to mean "to court" or "to pick up."
One pun I've heard bandied about occasionally in the US is "delay no more." It has a passing resemblance to "fuck your mother" in the Toisan dialect of Cantonese. Since the majority of the immigrants to the US were from Toisan or from the Seiyap area, and very few of them spoke English, most of them would automatically assume the Chinese meaning upon hearing the phrase. The pun doesn't work as well with Hong Kong Cantonese though.
The more surprising thing is that the French police were able to save anyone at all.
Companies certainly don't have the right to make money off their products. In the case of Microsoft, they should stop making the product that does not make them money (which they did) or put better locks on their product (which they did). So as much as it pains me to say it, Microsoft did the non-evil thing.
If the Kindle is too expensive without subsidies, and subsidies are impossible because it is too easy to crack, maybe it's not the Kindle's time yet. Maybe Amazon made a bad business decision by bringing it out this early. The point is, we shouldn't lose our property rights just because some famous people make a poor business decision.
I'm not saying people should drive companies out of business. But the current system as it exists isn't capitalism anymore, it's corporate socialism. And that's the antithesis to individual freedom (as in libre).
Except driving while tired isn't illegal.
Maybe it should be made illegal. I don't know. But driving while tired isn't drunk driving.
No, he finally got through all the requests to remove Bush from office.
But it still sounds real. Instead of sounding flat or somehow otherwise lacking like MP3's sound.
I mean, our brains can interpolate the missing pieces, and unless we listen very carefully, we really can't consciously tell the difference between a mid-quality recording and a high-quality recording, or a high-quality recording and a live performance. But from personal experience (and hence from a personal perspective), listening to music at a concert hall in a real performance puts me in a different mood than listening to a recording. Even if it was a recording playing in the background and the musicians were just doing the motions, I might not be able to say immediately what was wrong, but I would come out slightly upset.
It's freedom press, you insensitive, unpatriotic, red clod!
I would argue that North Korea is the world's largest military threat. They have what, the fourth largest standing army in the world, and a crazy, unpredictable dictator giving commands. The only somewhat ally North Korea has is China, and describing that relationship as an alliance is a bit of a stretch.
China isn't looking to start a war. Its interested in stability. North Korea, on the other hand, may very well be looking for the right excuse to internally justify war.
WHat does a women bring that a man doesn?
Eye candy.
And considering the complexity, it might be fine to keep it as a trade secret.
Of course, Intel wouldn't risk having their innovations copied, so they'd most likely patent their stuff at or near when they're about to release their product.
Wouldn't happen. It'd cost more to manufacture elsewhere. Said copies would still have to be made in China.
And you wonder why China isn't terribly interested in the whole "intellectual property" idea.
It has always puzzled me how some Americans can double-think on such a grand scale when talking about Tibet: almost the entire area of the US was taken by outright theft, swindle or larceny.
People, especially those of the television-fed generation, are afflicted with this mental condition that renders them unable to hold any opinions contrary to what they're fed by the television.
Sometimes, I wish teenagers would put their rebellious nature to good use, instead of wasting it on the insignificant things like staying out late or having sex. Problem is, by the time they get around to maturing enough to care about the bigger issues, they're too old to rebel against the group think.
DRM has nothing to do with copyright. Rejection of the GPL is a copyright matter. Rejection of DRM is not.
DRM's advertised purpose may be to prevent unlicensed distribution and unlicensed derived works. But call it collateral damage, or call it DRM's real, more sinister purpose, it prevents people from using the product they purchased as they see fit.
It's very common for people to bring up DRM preventing fair use as justification for why it is wrong. However, fair use is just the low hanging fruit. DRM takes away far more user rights, consumer rights, ownership rights that are far more obscure and probably not as accessible to anybody but students of philosophy of law.
To enumereate a few:
-The right to resell, to gift, and to inherit.
-The right to disseminate and modify.
-The right to destroy.
-The right to use for purposes other than intended.
These are all property rights, not copy rights. Property rights are inherent to any good, and secured by the 4th and the 14th amendments. Copy rights don't exist for anyone other than the creator to begin with, but can be granted to others at the discretion of the creator. See how they are completely unrelated?
The fact of the matter is, DRM creates a paradigm wherein the user is no longer an owner, but a licensor. And that is a very dangerous slippery slope that was started by software licenses (EULA). The idea that you don't own something you bought and paid for, that you are merely licensing it from the creator, implies that you have no property rights except what said creator grants you. And that, I would argue, is a form of slavery.
Better yet, target the ones who have kids.
Their attempts to reconcile this and the "think of the children" politics will surely cause their heads to explode.
Yeah, I thought James Bond destroys the instructions without reading them?
But that's a false dichotomy. It's never a choice purely between your family or somebody else's family. There are ways to keep both families alive. It's a matter of being willing to compromise.
The US doesn't compromise with anybody it deems a terrorist organization, which is where said dichotomy comes from. But that kind of hard-line for-us-or-against-us all-or-nothing stance is exactly what gets people into trouble, and is completely unnecessary. I'm not saying appease the terrorists. But if you know the answer before asking the question, then there never was a need to ask the question. In the same way, if you don't even approach a conflict with the "let's try to work something out" mentality, then a compromise just won't happen.
And that's why they don't work when the opposing side doesn't have anything to lose.