Gather all the equipment up. Go the local service office at the busiest time of the day. Wait in line. Turn all the equipment in and cancel on the spot.
I use a standard 4 channel home security recorder and mount a couple of standard home security cameras. Usually at least one over the rear view mirror, facing forward, and one facing to the rear.
The DVR, like most others, is 12V so it is trivial to wire into the system so it comes on automatically. With a 500MB drive, it keeps about two weeks of recordings.
The whole setup runs under 200 USD, 100USD for the DVR and about 35USD each camera.
I haven't caught anything exciting, but I did recently "shame" a local law enforcement officer who accused me of not fully stopping. I simply pointed to the camera and he told me to move along.
In that case, I am not sure where the threshold of not being able to build from source exists. If I release a 400k line GPL'd project (some 3k source files scattered over 50 directories) _without_ any Makefiles, configure, makefile.am or any of the supporting autotools input, could anyone except for me really compile it from source?
I think the implicit question that has been danced about but not really addressed is whether just plain old source, which is effectively the same as out-dated, unmaintained autotools (or other build) support is really compliant with the GPL. Is it legal for me to improve the source and publish, as obviously required, but at the same time, not publish updated autotools files?
I don't think so. I have found that BSD based software tends to lags in "bleeding edge" features (not that is is better or worse) since the people that use, customize and enhance BSD licensed software are not legally required to disclose these changes as it is required by GPL.
We can spend months developing a new feature on one our embedded systems. Once we are done, one of our company owners will have it broken in under 5 minutes. We call it the "Kevin Bug", aptly named after said owner.
Sometimes we toss an early and intentionally broken feature at him, just to get the Kevin Bug out of the way since that tends to be most stressful stage of the feature cycle.
I for some reason thought it was a study. Now the numbers may be extreme but does show the point that one is able to gets lots of assistance even at burger flippin' wages.
"I can tell you that you simply cannot live at a hamburger flipping salary. How? You cannot even pay rent with that."
Sure one could. Last year, a university (University of Missisippi?, cannot find link) released a study comparing a single parent that held minimum wage jobs vs a single parent that had a degree and a professional job. 15K vs 68K respectively.
Since the "burger flipper" is considered "poor", they qualified for many government programs. Rent subsistence, food stamps, health care, utility assistance, Earned Income Credit, etc. The result was that this class of worker had 38,000 USD of disposable income each year.
Since the professional at 68K does not qualify for any of these programs, their disposable income each year is 34K.
If someone knows the study, please correct my mistakes as I am going from memory.
I have fore and aft cameras on my vehicle that record when driving. It is fairly easy to setup. A mini camera mounted above the rear-view mirror. Another at the top of the back windshield. I replaced the stock lens on each with wide-angle to get a broader view but it is not as fun to watch the fish-eye results. The feeds are recorded on a vanilla 100 USD 4-channel home security camera system mounted in the trunk. Replaced the hard drive with an SSD and slightly modified to run off DC only. Spent about 225 USD on the entire system.
Nothing much to get excited about that has been recorded. Bad drivers, people running red lights, etc. Just waiting for the day to catch something awesome.
I have one alternative. Hunting stores. I recall hearing a spot done on the radio by a popular consumer advocate some time ago mentioning that some of the exact same hearing aids are also available at hunting stores, as low as $49.
This blurb is is older than the when I heard it but gives you the general idea:
The spot I heard mentioned the store line named Gander, which apparently the audiologist industry is try to get banned from them doing so. Sorry no source.
I had an idea as non-programmer and did know any programmers in the late 90's. My solution was to be become the programmer. I ended up scratching my own itch by tossing together a small music related app. It ended up paying my way through college a couple years later when I was laid off by the Fortune 500 company I was working for in '01. The software is still used though it is a nightmare for me to try to maintain.
I have lots more ideas that I know are capable of being written and there is even a market for them, but it is much harder for me to work on something one my own after spending all day working on company code.
Parent pretty much sums it up. As it stands now you have to buy a license to decrypt HDCP, and you get a key to do so. If you do not abide by the terms of the license, your key can get revoked and these revoked keys can be embedded in a content stream to block usage by the offending hardware. Though I am unaware of any that have been at this time.
I have in front of me a piece of hardware (that I have been developing on), that actually has a HDMI input and "may" be capable of decrypting that stream. I could then convert that stream into an IP stream, QAM, or even record to disk. However, the HDCP license forbids re-transmitting that stream over long distances in the clear or storing as such. So now this box is legally only capable of handling un-encrypted HDMI signals. I'm wondering if this information may allow devices to masquerade as a device from another manufacturer. Not that I would do that myself, but it seems that it could make "software" HDCP decryption systems more common. The software description is used loosely since much of this is currently handled in hardware or FPGA sub-systems.
"you don't have to know you're infringing to infringe."
Not necessarily. At least in the US, there is a concept of "good faith". The innocent purchaser doctrine, covered in Uniform Commercial Code, sections 1-201(9) and 2-403, allows for a good faith defense if the transaction took place in an ordinary course of business (e.g., non-suspicious) for a non-merchant buyer (consumer). Merchant rules slightly differ with reasonable commercial standards of fair dealing in the trade.
Yes, that is why the label says 0g and not transfat-free. FDA guidelines allow rounding down 0.49g to 0g for a single serving. So now it's just a matter of serving size manipulation to get it to 0.49g.
I've been trying to teach to family to correlate the food labels with the serving size and deduce what is consumed with a portion size (what you choose to eat). Who eats just one cookie?
Slashdot Mirror
Gather all the equipment up.
Go the local service office at the busiest time of the day.
Wait in line.
Turn all the equipment in and cancel on the spot.
The is no "customer retention service" there.
Heard a story on NPR recently about colleges manipulating waitlists:
http://www.marketplace.org/topics/business/education/waitlisted-college-heres-why/
Yahoo group was created in 2009 for some hacking into these.
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/q_see_hack
I use a standard 4 channel home security recorder and mount a couple of standard home security cameras. Usually at least one over the rear view mirror, facing forward, and one facing to the rear.
The DVR, like most others, is 12V so it is trivial to wire into the system so it comes on automatically. With a 500MB drive, it keeps about two weeks of recordings.
The whole setup runs under 200 USD, 100USD for the DVR and about 35USD each camera.
I haven't caught anything exciting, but I did recently "shame" a local law enforcement officer who accused me of not fully stopping. I simply pointed to the camera and he told me to move along.
Why stop at water or ground? Nuclear powered airplanes. Wait, already attempted:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_aircraft
"-wanted to go spend time with his LDR"
Large Diameter Roll?
In that case, I am not sure where the threshold of not being able to build from source exists. If I release a 400k line GPL'd project (some 3k source files scattered over 50 directories) _without_ any Makefiles, configure, makefile.am or any of the supporting autotools input, could anyone except for me really compile it from source?
I think the implicit question that has been danced about but not really addressed is whether just plain old source, which is effectively the same as out-dated, unmaintained autotools (or other build) support is really compliant with the GPL. Is it legal for me to improve the source and publish, as obviously required, but at the same time, not publish updated autotools files?
I don't think so. I have found that BSD based software tends to lags in "bleeding edge" features (not that is is better or worse) since the people that use, customize and enhance BSD licensed software are not legally required to disclose these changes as it is required by GPL.
> Probably enough for about 90% of everyone's one go trips
Some seems to think even better than that, 95% of all trips can be made under EV.
google 95% trips ev
We can spend months developing a new feature on one our embedded systems. Once we are done, one of our company owners will have it broken in under 5 minutes. We call it the "Kevin Bug", aptly named after said owner.
Sometimes we toss an early and intentionally broken feature at him, just to get the Kevin Bug out of the way since that tends to be most stressful stage of the feature cycle.
Here's a source:
http://www.zerohedge.com/article/entitlement-america-head-household-making-minimum-wage-has-more-disposable-income-family-mak
I for some reason thought it was a study. Now the numbers may be extreme but does show the point that one is able to gets lots of assistance even at burger flippin' wages.
"I can tell you that you simply cannot live at a hamburger flipping salary. How? You cannot even pay rent with that."
Sure one could. Last year, a university (University of Missisippi?, cannot find link) released a study comparing a single parent that held minimum wage jobs vs a single parent that had a degree and a professional job. 15K vs 68K respectively.
Since the "burger flipper" is considered "poor", they qualified for many government programs. Rent subsistence, food stamps, health care, utility assistance, Earned Income Credit, etc. The result was that this class of worker had 38,000 USD of disposable income each year.
Since the professional at 68K does not qualify for any of these programs, their disposable income each year is 34K.
If someone knows the study, please correct my mistakes as I am going from memory.
I have fore and aft cameras on my vehicle that record when driving. It is fairly easy to setup. A mini camera mounted above the rear-view mirror. Another at the top of the back windshield. I replaced the stock lens on each with wide-angle to get a broader view but it is not as fun to watch the fish-eye results. The feeds are recorded on a vanilla 100 USD 4-channel home security camera system mounted in the trunk. Replaced the hard drive with an SSD and slightly modified to run off DC only. Spent about 225 USD on the entire system.
Nothing much to get excited about that has been recorded. Bad drivers, people running red lights, etc. Just waiting for the day to catch something awesome.
I have one alternative. Hunting stores. I recall hearing a spot done on the radio by a popular consumer advocate some time ago mentioning that some of the exact same hearing aids are also available at hunting stores, as low as $49.
This blurb is is older than the when I heard it but gives you the general idea:
http://www.clarkhoward.com/news/clark-howard/uncategorized/finding-the-hearing-aid-thats-right-for-you/nCtt/
The spot I heard mentioned the store line named Gander, which apparently the audiologist industry is try to get banned from them doing so. Sorry no source.
See a cute person with a puppy or a funny hat or whatever's interesting, take a shot, hand it to them, ask them out.
Forget the pass (at least you have that reset/mailed), how does [s]he remember that login?
"Keep a pretty big satellite"
Philip J Fry suggested trash.
5 hours would be daylight again? You mean I would have to look at that last-call score in the daylight? No thanks!
"See you later honey, catch me again on standard time."
"self-destruct signal to every existing PS3"
DirectTV did something like that in 2001 to combat DirecTV card piracy:
http://www.securityfocus.com/news/143
I had an idea as non-programmer and did know any programmers in the late 90's. My solution was to be become the programmer. I ended up scratching my own itch by tossing together a small music related app. It ended up paying my way through college a couple years later when I was laid off by the Fortune 500 company I was working for in '01. The software is still used though it is a nightmare for me to try to maintain.
I have lots more ideas that I know are capable of being written and there is even a market for them, but it is much harder for me to work on something one my own after spending all day working on company code.
I thought it was get rid of the "Chicken" stigma. Wasn't fair to call it chicken anymore using modern growth techniques.
Parent pretty much sums it up. As it stands now you have to buy a license to decrypt HDCP, and you get a key to do so. If you do not abide by the terms of the license, your key can get revoked and these revoked keys can be embedded in a content stream to block usage by the offending hardware. Though I am unaware of any that have been at this time.
I have in front of me a piece of hardware (that I have been developing on), that actually has a HDMI input and "may" be capable of decrypting that stream. I could then convert that stream into an IP stream, QAM, or even record to disk. However, the HDCP license forbids re-transmitting that stream over long distances in the clear or storing as such. So now this box is legally only capable of handling un-encrypted HDMI signals. I'm wondering if this information may allow devices to masquerade as a device from another manufacturer. Not that I would do that myself, but it seems that it could make "software" HDCP decryption systems more common. The software description is used loosely since much of this is currently handled in hardware or FPGA sub-systems.
"you don't have to know you're infringing to infringe."
Not necessarily. At least in the US, there is a concept of "good faith". The innocent purchaser doctrine, covered in Uniform Commercial Code, sections 1-201(9) and 2-403, allows for a good faith defense if the transaction took place in an ordinary course of business (e.g., non-suspicious) for a non-merchant buyer (consumer). Merchant rules slightly differ with reasonable commercial standards of fair dealing in the trade.
That seems to apply to just "single serving" portions, hardly applicable to the tub of crisco I just bought:
http://www.fda.gov/Food/LabelingNutrition/FoodLabelingGuidanceRegulatoryInformation/InspectionCompliance/WarningOtherLetters/ucm110234.htm
There is even an article just last month admitting that they [FDA] are still evaluating the "serving size" issue:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/06/business/06portion.html
Yes, that is why the label says 0g and not transfat-free. FDA guidelines allow rounding down 0.49g to 0g for a single serving. So now it's just a matter of serving size manipulation to get it to 0.49g.
I've been trying to teach to family to correlate the food labels with the serving size and deduce what is consumed with a portion size (what you choose to eat). Who eats just one cookie?