A shitty little Cessna with zero auto controls and instant death on a a mistake is a hell of a lot more stressful and panic inducing than sitting in a large computer/gaming rig.
Its REALLY not that hard.
I remember playing MS Flight simulator on my grandfathers IBM XT with hercules monochrome graphics, and we were, after some practice able to land a cessna.
Now before you rightfully mock me... in practice years later we got to actually fly a cessna, and in reality its much easier to land. (at least in half decent conditions). There's lots more feedback to what you are doing and its far easier to line up the runway in the real life than it was in the game.
In other words, its not as hard as you'd think it is, and its actually easier in hte real world than in the simulators IMO.
Actually both sites spend 80% of their time rules lawyering.
"This question isn't formatted right" "I should get the points" This question hasn't had its points awarded" "This is not a good question for stackoverflow because there is no one answer and people might disagree.." "Hey all you did was repeat my answer with an example..."...
I'd pick which ever site was curated to remove that crap once the question was answered.
True enough. The two "remaining seats" were intended to refer to the same set. Good problems are harder to write than you'd think.:)
The correct answer on a test is either answer. The best answer would be to write both interpretations. This is just one more reason why multiple choice sucks.
Yes. The two instances of "remaining seats" were intended to refer to the same set. this example highlights how hard it is to write good unambiguous math problems.:)
I never understood this - why do people carry their change home and dump them in jars?
What other option do I have? I'm certainly not going to pre-load the pants I put on today with the change from my pockets from yesterday, and repeat. So when I unload my pants to throw them in the wash the change goes in a jar.
I spend my change - not always to make exact change, but to make convenient change (e.g., if it's $3.55, I might use a $5 and a nickel to get $1.50 in change), or a $5 and three quarters to get back two dimes and a twoonie. Do it enough times and the change goes down very quick.
Yes, I do this too, that's why I called it my 'days' change, since regardless I'll still end up with some change at the end of the day. And honestly, I don't make that many cash transactions -- certainly not even one a day -- which just goes back to my first point about how silly it would be to pre-load my pants with yesterday's change.
Assuming stores do it. I've seen many a ripoff stores that don't implement the policy (it's voluntary, after all),
I don't think it is voluntary. I'm pretty sure its the law.
and many more that used the opportunity for a small price hike.
Not really. I'm not seeing any screwball prices... everything is still $x.99 except at walmart where its $x.98
And I've noticed how prices almost inevitably end up at values that round UP than down - i.e., they end in 3, 4, 8 or 9 far more often (triggering a round up) than 1, 2, 6 or 7 (round down).
Again, I'd love to know where you shop. This strategy -- which I have never even actually SEEN, doesn't work anyway, they only round the total, so as soon as you buy multiple items, and factor in taxes, its pretty random where its going to end up.
And in Canada plastic out numbers cash pretty heavily - even fast food and convenience stores do more plastic than cash and everything is rounded to the penny on plastic transactions.
It's why I quit frequenting a popular Canadian hamburger chain because their franchisees kept dinging me 4 cents (the totals kept coming out like $8.61 or something, so most places would round down and charge $8.60, but they kept rounding up to $8.65). It's only 4 cents, but still, you don't have to rip off your customers that badly.
Not saying you didn't have this experience, but my experience has been overwhelmingly that businesses either just round down or do the recommend symmetric rounding to the nearest nickle as recommended by the federal govt.
In fact, it's one the arguments that the US uses against eliminating the penny - because there are so many low-income people that would get screwed over...
Its a ridiculous argument that doesn't stand up to any scrutiny - do the math. The rounding rules, with symmetric rounding pretty well break even. And the US could make that law instead of 'voluntary' to ease any fears.
And even a statistical outlier with symmetric rounding is going to be out maybe $10 (or up $10 if he's an outlier on the lucy-side) This isn't some great burden, even on the poor.
There are 37 seats in the hall. 5 are reserved for VIPs. Of the remaining seats 20 are filled. What percentage of the remaining seats are left.
Those two references to "remaining seats" was intended to refer to the same pool. I absolutely could have phrased it more clearly.
Or did you mean what percentage of the seats not filled by VIPs are empty?
Not quite. I meant what percentage of the seats not reserved for VIPs are empty; its unspecified whether those seats were actually occupied or not. So your suggested "fix" leaves it to the problem solver to make an assumption that those reserved seats are either full or empty.
If nothing else it highlights the very valid point that writing good unambiguous interesting math problems is surprisingly difficult -- I curse at my daughters text book daily for some of the idiotic questions in it... my recent favorite being:
"How many combinations of coins can you think of that add up to a dollar? Show how each adds up to a dollar." in a grade 5 text book"
The author is clearly fishing for 4 or 5 different 'solutions', which is fine. But they have effectively asked us to write out the exhaustive list if you can think of it, which is absurd.
These cards are issued to minimum-wage employees that can't get bank accounts (because they have a history of overdrawing them.) If they had bank accounts, they wouldn't need the cards.
Except that the cards are abusive - with much higher fees than normal. The card provider has no risk - they are pre-paid debit cards for crying out loud. So its abusive to the employees.
Additionally, since the employer is getting kickbacks, they have an incentive to put all employees on them, even those with bank accounts and good credit, and so they erect obstacles and hurdles to allowing employees with bank accounts from being able to use them.
In the olden days, unbanked employees would have to get paper checks, which they would then take to high-fee check-cashing shops
Which have also gotten a bit of a legal ass-kicking lately. So now payroll cards is the new "scam" to abuse those people.
My grandmother lived a sighted life but her vision is deteriorating with age, and while she is unlikely to ever learn braille she had no problem mastering the new "not really braille" on the new bills. I think its a good solution.
Definitely disagree on the 1/2 bills though. Canada got rid of both years ago, and there's just too much bloody change. I need to get suspenders or something.
Heh, i just throw my days change accumulation into a jar and take it the bank every couple months. TD and BMO and others have been rolling out free automated coin sorting machines -- and that works well for me.
And while I can see the argument that paper was more convenient -- the higher value coins are almost a necessity for modern vending machine prices / parking meters / etc although most are taking plastic now. And I agree with the financial argument that the coin is cheaper for the government to circulate so its an inconvenience I don't object to.
As for the penny - yeah we agree there - they did a good job on getting rid of the coin, while implementing sensible pricing and rounding policies. Its loss isn't hurting anyone except maybe charities. But I've got to believe there are better ways to collect money for charity than one penny at a time.
I see no reason any early teen that is willing to apply themselves could not do the same thing that I did and put forth a concentrated effort towards giving themselves a better future.
Yes, no reason why any particular early teen that is blah blah blah can't do the same thing.
But all of them? Lets say every one in the country were to take up your challenge. They'd all be above average earners?
Do you see the inherent basic math problem with that premise?
We need a solution that works for society, a solution that works for everyone. Not just someone in particular. Because a solution that elevates a few who try hard isn't really a solution, because if everyone tries hard then it doesn't work any more.
If everyone goes to school, and everyone busts their ass, and everyone applies themselves, then at the end of the tunnel... the pyramid of available jobs still needs to be filled, and the pyramid has a very large base.
If everyone does what you did, then some of them are still going to be stocking shelves at walmart and serving coffee at starbucks.
So we need to just accept that, and design an economy where we can compete with our peers to better our position in a job 'market' while at the same time ensuring that the bottom end of it is still pretty livable, since nobody how hard everyone tries an awful lot of us are going to be living there.
Yes, and I'm sure you won't care if the cops pull you over for a random drug test because you don't have any drugs. If you have nothing to hide, then who cares if your privacy is invaded, right?
How on earth is that even close to the same thing?
An example of the same thing would be if the government subpoenaed facebook for a list of users who were all publicly advertising that they had heroine for sale.
And in that subpoena suppose they also pick up a couple facebook accounts who belong to people who work for chemical suppliers who do in fact legally produce and distribute heroine to universities, safe injection sites, research hospitals, and so forth. They have all the permits, keep all their records, their customers are all authorized.
So the government requests their names, sees that they are above board -- who cares. So it maybe audits them to make sure they aren't selling heroine on the side straight to the public. (They were advertising on facebook after all...)
That is not the jack booted thugs detaining you and subjecting you to needles at random. Try to maintain a sense of perspective.
This is not an "important step" towards anything. The NIF system cannot be used as the basis for a power plant, something everyone, including the NIF, is very much aware of. It is an experimental system for studying matter at high densities, and not even very good at that.
The input absorbed by the fuel is less than the output at the fuel. That is a very important step, showing that we can actually get more energy out than we are putting in.
Yes, the net energy of the entire system is still very negative, and even once that is actually at truly net break even that's still a very long way from a commercially viable power plant... nobody is going to build a billion dollar power plant that requires 500MJ to get 520MJ out.
Nobody is claiming mr. fusion for your car is around the corner.
There were definitely gaming cards in the 486 era. A VLB video card will run DOOM faster than an ISA card. A Tseng ET4000 will run DOOM faster than a crappy Trident.
Not in 1994. That didn't exist yet as a thing.
If you wanted a computer for games the main requirement was a fast cpu, and a soundblaster and well that's it. Take a look at the system req's of the big games of that era:
Privateer - 386DX - 33, 256 color VGA, sound blaster, 2x cd-rom (although there was a floppy disk based version iirc)
"A gaming video card" was not a requirement, or even a recommendation, or really even 'a thing'. If you wanted any of the above games to play better in 1994, you'd have gotten a 486DX2-66 or DX4. They'd have come with VLB or even PCI video cards -- but you would have only cared that the card used the VLB or PCI socket; it mattered far less what was actually in it.
It wasn't until Voodoo in 1996 released its first PCI card that a 'gaming card' even meant something. And then arrival of the AGP slot and the RIVA TNT, Matrox Mystique, Diamond Monster etc, that things really got going and a gaming card was 'a thing'.
"There were definitely gaming cards in the 486 era."
If by 486 era, you mean the tail end, after the pentiums were becoming mainstream. (The 486 DX4 stuff was released after the first pentium landed after all).
The first Quake was probably the first game that people were starting to think about what was in the video card socket.
Now we're seeing, and a LOT of people are having buyers remorse.
Majority of the country favors obamacare. The majority of the country that republicans like to say support getting rid of it are split - 2/3rds actually think it goes too far... 1/3 doesn't think it goes far enough. that 1/3rd of so called group 'against the bill' doesn't want the act repealed... they wanted it expanded. Couple that with nearly 50% that identify as supporting the bill and you have a clear majority.
So I don't really see buyers remorse yet, what I see is 40 odd republican tea party candidates from election proof gerrymandered disctricts that literally cannot lose no matter how braindead they act have decided to hold the entire country hostage.
As an aside, Bill O'Reilly while a guest on the daily show suggested, really, the most sane compromises I've heard.
The US government is so absurdly screwed up -- giving state governers the electoral powers they have was idiotic. All aspects of elections should be run by completely non-partisan groups with no interfering with the state or federal political parties. From identifying districts to running the election itself.
That same episode of the daily show had another good factoid -- 90% incumbency rate, 10% approval rate. It's broken.
And why exactly welfare spending has steadily raised since then to more than the double of the expenditure per capita?
My parents first home was $20,000 the same house today is over $100,000. Gasoline was 0.36 cents a gallon. Today its $4.00. A dozen eggs was $0.62, today its $2.00
You are claiming welfare spending has only doubled per capita? The price of everything else has increased 4 fold to 10 fold, while the welfare has only doubled.
What exactly are you complaining about? That's a substantial reduction, using the numbers you yourself are claiming to be true.
Model releases are relevant only to images that are paid for.
That's not actually it at all. Releases are required for commercial / endorsement purposes -- paid or not.
But I think they still need model releases because it is porn -- and distributors of porn need signed releases -- including declarations from the models that they are of age. Be interesting to see one of these revenge sites taken out for child porn. Finally be a legitimate use for prosecuting someone with images of an almost-but-not-quite-18-year-old.
But model releases are somewhat beside the point, they can also be nailed if any images were taken by the women in the picture -- and then sent or texted to her now ex. Because she, not he, has full copyright ownership over the image.
I think you are right; even if there were no instances with minors involved they should still have the obligations to ensure all the photos are of legal adults -- and that means having documentation for all their models.
Copyright belongs to the author, who may or may not be the subject.
The subject of a photo also has rights over the image.
If the photographer is not the subject, and if the subject is a particular person or 'model', that person needs to sign a 'model release' before the photographer can publish it to a commercial website.
'Revenge porn' is nearly always copyright violation. Clearly the 'model' has not signed off on this usage, and in the case of 'sexting' in particular, the 'model' is usually the 'photographer' too and therefore has ALL publication and distribution rights to the image, not just the model rights.
Anyone publishing revenge porn or hosting revenge porn sites is operating on the same level of self delusion as kazaa had when it asserted it 'presumes its users had the rights to the files being shared' while at the same time advertising you could get all the top hits for free.
Same thing here, they disclaim that the photo submitters have the rights to submit these photos while at the same time promoting the ability to get revenge on your ex by publishing the pictures she sexted you... literally inducing copyright infringment by definition.
If anything these website operators deserve to be shut down more than Kazaa did because these guys are are actually hosting/distributing the content.
Even if AGPL wasn't good for "just" DNS and DHCP servers alone, that's enough to make it non-free. That's discrimination against fields of endeavour.
The AGPLv3 and GPLv3 are complementary and compatible and the GPLv3 should be (and is suitable) for those endeavors that are not suitable for AGPLv3.
Arguing that if a license isn't fit for a purpose that makes is like arguing the BSD or GPL are non-free licenses because they aren't suitable for licensing the use of trademarks.
The one where you need to prominently let every user that interacts over the network (and not merely a recipient of the program itself) download the source.
Seems to me this could be accomplished with a mail header.
The thing is, hardly any protocol and payload other than html/xhtml over http allows arbitrary ancillary data.
I'm having trouble thinking of one where it would both be realistically desirable for the software to be AGPL vs GPL AND where this could not be accommodated.
In nearly all software that you would offer to users remotely, they are going to have accounts. And I believe you can use that account creation interaction to disclose your source obligations, and provide a download linke (via the confirmation email, or the web form you sign up with, etc).
I certainly don't read it as being required to disclose to users via a hypothetical primarily machine-read interaction protocol, nor must you do it every single machine-read transaction with the the user.
For the AGPL to be truly difficult to use it would need to be a public facing anonymous service with a standardized protocol that wasn't web based, and where the user provided their own client.
So..the AGPL isn't much good for public DNS and DHCP servers. What else?
In any case I don't think anyone who created the license really wanted or expected the AGPL to be contorted into those scenarios anyway. It was aimed squarely at the multitude of web-based SaaS stuff.
It's basically just a conventional USB connector with a big blob of silicone applied inside.
That won't corrode, short, or ever leak? Even after the stress of having a charging cord attached and detached daily for a few years, the odd drop, and probably the odd drop-and-swing-from-the-usb-cord too.
Look, I know it can be done, but you've got to agree that waterproofing an electrically live hole is going to be harder and less reliable than not having a hole in the first place.
It's also make getting the phone apart without destroying it even harder.
Given the percentage of phones that need to be taken apart due to water damage, or charging port damage eliminating them would dramatically reduce the need to take them apart.
All that leaves as common failure points is the outer glass, and inner LCD and battery. The glass can trivially be outside the membrane so that's a non-issue.
the battery and screen -- yeah, you'll have to break the membrane to replace those, but in practice, so what.
If after you bleed the LCD, and have it serviced, or 2-3 years down the road you have the battery swapped out its not guaranteed to be a waterproof phone anymore. (in practice, technicians should be able to re-seal it pretty good -- water isn't likely to even penetrate the outer case since there aren't any giant holes - aka usb ports )
Sometimes people do have to go away from home for more than one day, and the charging pad takes valuable space in the bag.
A standard for charging pads resolves that for a lot of people.
But as I've said before, its a tradeoff I'm willing to make for a waterproof phone. I don't really object to there being usb phones on the market so you can have what you want, but I don't want USB as a legal requirement because that will force charging pad phones to needlessly have a hole in them.
Slashdot Mirror
A shitty little Cessna with zero auto controls and instant death on a a mistake is a hell of a lot more stressful and panic inducing than sitting in a large computer/gaming rig.
Its REALLY not that hard.
I remember playing MS Flight simulator on my grandfathers IBM XT with hercules monochrome graphics, and we were, after some practice able to land a cessna.
Now before you rightfully mock me... in practice years later we got to actually fly a cessna, and in reality its much easier to land. (at least in half decent conditions). There's lots more feedback to what you are doing and its far easier to line up the runway in the real life than it was in the game.
In other words, its not as hard as you'd think it is, and its actually easier in hte real world than in the simulators IMO.
At least in good weather / good visibility.
Actually both sites spend 80% of their time rules lawyering.
"This question isn't formatted right" "I should get the points" This question hasn't had its points awarded" "This is not a good question for stackoverflow because there is no one answer and people might disagree.." "Hey all you did was repeat my answer with an example..." ...
I'd pick which ever site was curated to remove that crap once the question was answered.
True enough. The two "remaining seats" were intended to refer to the same set. Good problems are harder to write than you'd think. :)
The correct answer on a test is either answer. The best answer would be to write both interpretations. This is just one more reason why multiple choice sucks.
Yes. The two instances of "remaining seats" were intended to refer to the same set. this example highlights how hard it is to write good unambiguous math problems. :)
I never understood this - why do people carry their change home and dump them in jars?
What other option do I have? I'm certainly not going to pre-load the pants I put on today with the change from my pockets from yesterday, and repeat. So when I unload my pants to throw them in the wash the change goes in a jar.
I spend my change - not always to make exact change, but to make convenient change (e.g., if it's $3.55, I might use a $5 and a nickel to get $1.50 in change), or a $5 and three quarters to get back two dimes and a twoonie. Do it enough times and the change goes down very quick.
Yes, I do this too, that's why I called it my 'days' change, since regardless I'll still end up with some change at the end of the day. And honestly, I don't make that many cash transactions -- certainly not even one a day -- which just goes back to my first point about how silly it would be to pre-load my pants with yesterday's change.
Assuming stores do it. I've seen many a ripoff stores that don't implement the policy (it's voluntary, after all),
I don't think it is voluntary. I'm pretty sure its the law.
and many more that used the opportunity for a small price hike.
Not really. I'm not seeing any screwball prices... everything is still $x.99 except at walmart where its $x.98
And I've noticed how prices almost inevitably end up at values that round UP than down - i.e., they end in 3, 4, 8 or 9 far more often (triggering a round up) than 1, 2, 6 or 7 (round down).
Again, I'd love to know where you shop. This strategy -- which I have never even actually SEEN, doesn't work anyway, they only round the total, so as soon as you buy multiple items, and factor in taxes, its pretty random where its going to end up.
And in Canada plastic out numbers cash pretty heavily - even fast food and convenience stores do more plastic than cash and everything is rounded to the penny on plastic transactions.
It's why I quit frequenting a popular Canadian hamburger chain because their franchisees kept dinging me 4 cents (the totals kept coming out like $8.61 or something, so most places would round down and charge $8.60, but they kept rounding up to $8.65). It's only 4 cents, but still, you don't have to rip off your customers that badly.
Not saying you didn't have this experience, but my experience has been overwhelmingly that businesses either just round down or do the recommend symmetric rounding to the nearest nickle as recommended by the federal govt.
In fact, it's one the arguments that the US uses against eliminating the penny - because there are so many low-income people that would get screwed over ...
Its a ridiculous argument that doesn't stand up to any scrutiny - do the math. The rounding rules, with symmetric rounding pretty well break even. And the US could make that law instead of 'voluntary' to ease any fears.
And even a statistical outlier with symmetric rounding is going to be out maybe $10 (or up $10 if he's an outlier on the lucy-side) This isn't some great burden, even on the poor.
There are 37 seats in the hall. 5 are reserved for VIPs. Of the remaining seats 20 are filled. What percentage of the remaining seats are left.
Those two references to "remaining seats" was intended to refer to the same pool. I absolutely could have phrased it more clearly.
Or did you mean what percentage of the seats not filled by VIPs are empty?
Not quite. I meant what percentage of the seats not reserved for VIPs are empty; its unspecified whether those seats were actually occupied or not. So your suggested "fix" leaves it to the problem solver to make an assumption that those reserved seats are either full or empty.
If nothing else it highlights the very valid point that writing good unambiguous interesting math problems is surprisingly difficult -- I curse at my daughters text book daily for some of the idiotic questions in it... my recent favorite being:
"How many combinations of coins can you think of that add up to a dollar? Show how each adds up to a dollar." in a grade 5 text book"
The author is clearly fishing for 4 or 5 different 'solutions', which is fine. But they have effectively asked us to write out the exhaustive list if you can think of it, which is absurd.
These cards are issued to minimum-wage employees that can't get bank accounts (because they have a history of overdrawing them.) If they had bank accounts, they wouldn't need the cards.
Except that the cards are abusive - with much higher fees than normal. The card provider has no risk - they are pre-paid debit cards for crying out loud. So its abusive to the employees.
Additionally, since the employer is getting kickbacks, they have an incentive to put all employees on them, even those with bank accounts and good credit, and so they erect obstacles and hurdles to allowing employees with bank accounts from being able to use them.
In the olden days, unbanked employees would have to get paper checks, which they would then take to high-fee check-cashing shops
Which have also gotten a bit of a legal ass-kicking lately. So now payroll cards is the new "scam" to abuse those people.
There is a surprisingly high share of adults who can not comprehend a text they read (a skill, ironically, often practized in math classes).
Precisely, one cannot answer the question if one cannot determine what it is asking.
Any idiot can solve 100-(20/(37-5)*100) especially if they have a calculator. But:
There are 37 seats in the hall. 5 are reserved for VIPs. Of the remaining seats 20 are filled. What percentage of the remaining seats are left.
Is a whole other ballgame.
Their last example - payroll cards with fees ought to be outright illegal. IMO.
I like how euros (and most European currencies in general, IME) physically scale(d) with value, very handy even for a person with good vision.
Whereas I dislike that.
I think Canada has enough, between the colors, and the tactile feedback.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_currency_tactile_feature
My grandmother lived a sighted life but her vision is deteriorating with age, and while she is unlikely to ever learn braille she had no problem mastering the new "not really braille" on the new bills. I think its a good solution.
Definitely disagree on the 1/2 bills though. Canada got rid of both years ago, and there's just too much bloody change. I need to get suspenders or something.
Heh, i just throw my days change accumulation into a jar and take it the bank every couple months. TD and BMO and others have been rolling out free automated coin sorting machines -- and that works well for me.
And while I can see the argument that paper was more convenient -- the higher value coins are almost a necessity for modern vending machine prices / parking meters / etc although most are taking plastic now. And I agree with the financial argument that the coin is cheaper for the government to circulate so its an inconvenience I don't object to.
As for the penny - yeah we agree there - they did a good job on getting rid of the coin, while implementing sensible pricing and rounding policies. Its loss isn't hurting anyone except maybe charities. But I've got to believe there are better ways to collect money for charity than one penny at a time.
I see no reason any early teen that is willing to apply themselves could not do the same thing that I did and put forth a concentrated effort towards giving themselves a better future.
Yes, no reason why any particular early teen that is blah blah blah can't do the same thing.
But all of them? Lets say every one in the country were to take up your challenge. They'd all be above average earners?
Do you see the inherent basic math problem with that premise?
We need a solution that works for society, a solution that works for everyone. Not just someone in particular. Because a solution that elevates a few who try hard isn't really a solution, because if everyone tries hard then it doesn't work any more.
If everyone goes to school, and everyone busts their ass, and everyone applies themselves, then at the end of the tunnel... the pyramid of available jobs still needs to be filled, and the pyramid has a very large base.
If everyone does what you did, then some of them are still going to be stocking shelves at walmart and serving coffee at starbucks.
So we need to just accept that, and design an economy where we can compete with our peers to better our position in a job 'market' while at the same time ensuring that the bottom end of it is still pretty livable, since nobody how hard everyone tries an awful lot of us are going to be living there.
Yes, and I'm sure you won't care if the cops pull you over for a random drug test because you don't have any drugs. If you have nothing to hide, then who cares if your privacy is invaded, right?
How on earth is that even close to the same thing?
An example of the same thing would be if the government subpoenaed facebook for a list of users who were all publicly advertising that they had heroine for sale.
And in that subpoena suppose they also pick up a couple facebook accounts who belong to people who work for chemical suppliers who do in fact legally produce and distribute heroine to universities, safe injection sites, research hospitals, and so forth. They have all the permits, keep all their records, their customers are all authorized.
So the government requests their names, sees that they are above board -- who cares. So it maybe audits them to make sure they aren't selling heroine on the side straight to the public. (They were advertising on facebook after all...)
That is not the jack booted thugs detaining you and subjecting you to needles at random. Try to maintain a sense of perspective.
This article, and apparently most people on slashdot make the assumption that nobody who ever starts a BnB actually obtains the necessary permits.
And what do those people care if NYC subpoenas their user name/address/phone from AirBnB?
They
a) aren't doing anything wrong, they have the permits.
b) they have the permits, so they've already registered their name, address, and phone number in conjunction with the exact activity in question.
This is not an "important step" towards anything. The NIF system cannot be used as the basis for a power plant, something everyone, including the NIF, is very much aware of. It is an experimental system for studying matter at high densities, and not even very good at that.
The input absorbed by the fuel is less than the output at the fuel. That is a very important step, showing that we can actually get more energy out than we are putting in.
Yes, the net energy of the entire system is still very negative, and even once that is actually at truly net break even that's still a very long way from a commercially viable power plant... nobody is going to build a billion dollar power plant that requires 500MJ to get 520MJ out.
Nobody is claiming mr. fusion for your car is around the corner.
But this is a significant milestone.
There were definitely gaming cards in the 486 era. A VLB video card will run DOOM faster than an ISA card. A Tseng ET4000 will run DOOM faster than a crappy Trident.
Not in 1994. That didn't exist yet as a thing.
If you wanted a computer for games the main requirement was a fast cpu, and a soundblaster and well that's it. Take a look at the system req's of the big games of that era:
Privateer - 386DX - 33, 256 color VGA, sound blaster, 2x cd-rom (although there was a floppy disk based version iirc)
Doom II - 386DX - 33, 4MB RAM, VGA, soundblaster
Wing Commander III - 486DX 50, svga, 369kb free conventional, soundblaster
"A gaming video card" was not a requirement, or even a recommendation, or really even 'a thing'. If you wanted any of the above games to play better in 1994, you'd have gotten a 486DX2-66 or DX4. They'd have come with VLB or even PCI video cards -- but you would have only cared that the card used the VLB or PCI socket; it mattered far less what was actually in it.
It wasn't until Voodoo in 1996 released its first PCI card that a 'gaming card' even meant something. And then arrival of the AGP slot and the RIVA TNT, Matrox Mystique, Diamond Monster etc, that things really got going and a gaming card was 'a thing'.
"There were definitely gaming cards in the 486 era."
If by 486 era, you mean the tail end, after the pentiums were becoming mainstream. (The 486 DX4 stuff was released after the first pentium landed after all).
The first Quake was probably the first game that people were starting to think about what was in the video card socket.
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/real-thing,45.html
for the lols ^
Now we're seeing, and a LOT of people are having buyers remorse.
Majority of the country favors obamacare. The majority of the country that republicans like to say support getting rid of it are split - 2/3rds actually think it goes too far... 1/3 doesn't think it goes far enough. that 1/3rd of so called group 'against the bill' doesn't want the act repealed ... they wanted it expanded. Couple that with nearly 50% that identify as supporting the bill and you have a clear majority.
So I don't really see buyers remorse yet, what I see is 40 odd republican tea party candidates from election proof gerrymandered disctricts that literally cannot lose no matter how braindead they act have decided to hold the entire country hostage.
As an aside, Bill O'Reilly while a guest on the daily show suggested, really, the most sane compromises I've heard.
The US government is so absurdly screwed up -- giving state governers the electoral powers they have was idiotic. All aspects of elections should be run by completely non-partisan groups with no interfering with the state or federal political parties. From identifying districts to running the election itself.
That same episode of the daily show had another good factoid -- 90% incumbency rate, 10% approval rate. It's broken.
And why exactly welfare spending has steadily raised since then to more than the double of the expenditure per capita?
My parents first home was $20,000 the same house today is over $100,000. Gasoline was 0.36 cents a gallon. Today its $4.00. A dozen eggs was $0.62, today its $2.00
You are claiming welfare spending has only doubled per capita?
The price of everything else has increased 4 fold to 10 fold, while the welfare has only doubled.
What exactly are you complaining about? That's a substantial reduction, using the numbers you yourself are claiming to be true.
Model releases are relevant only to images that are paid for.
That's not actually it at all. Releases are required for commercial / endorsement purposes -- paid or not.
But I think they still need model releases because it is porn -- and distributors of porn need signed releases -- including declarations from the models that they are of age. Be interesting to see one of these revenge sites taken out for child porn. Finally be a legitimate use for prosecuting someone with images of an almost-but-not-quite-18-year-old.
But model releases are somewhat beside the point, they can also be nailed if any images were taken by the women in the picture -- and then sent or texted to her now ex. Because she, not he, has full copyright ownership over the image.
I think you are right; even if there were no instances with minors involved they should still have the obligations to ensure all the photos are of legal adults -- and that means having documentation for all their models.
Copyright belongs to the author, who may or may not be the subject.
The subject of a photo also has rights over the image.
If the photographer is not the subject, and if the subject is a particular person or 'model', that person needs to sign a 'model release' before the photographer can publish it to a commercial website.
'Revenge porn' is nearly always copyright violation. Clearly the 'model' has not signed off on this usage, and in the case of 'sexting' in particular, the 'model' is usually the 'photographer' too and therefore has ALL publication and distribution rights to the image, not just the model rights.
Anyone publishing revenge porn or hosting revenge porn sites is operating on the same level of self delusion as kazaa had when it asserted it 'presumes its users had the rights to the files being shared' while at the same time advertising you could get all the top hits for free.
Same thing here, they disclaim that the photo submitters have the rights to submit these photos while at the same time promoting the ability to get revenge on your ex by publishing the pictures she sexted you... literally inducing copyright infringment by definition.
If anything these website operators deserve to be shut down more than Kazaa did because these guys are are actually hosting/distributing the content.
Even if AGPL wasn't good for "just" DNS and DHCP servers alone, that's enough to make it non-free. That's discrimination against fields of endeavour.
The AGPLv3 and GPLv3 are complementary and compatible and the GPLv3 should be (and is suitable) for those endeavors that are not suitable for AGPLv3.
Arguing that if a license isn't fit for a purpose that makes is like arguing the BSD or GPL are non-free licenses because they aren't suitable for licensing the use of trademarks.
The one where you need to prominently let every user that interacts over the network (and not merely a recipient of the program itself) download the source.
Seems to me this could be accomplished with a mail header.
The thing is, hardly any protocol and payload other than html/xhtml over http allows arbitrary ancillary data.
I'm having trouble thinking of one where it would both be realistically desirable for the software to be AGPL vs GPL AND where this could not be accommodated.
In nearly all software that you would offer to users remotely, they are going to have accounts. And I believe you can use that account creation interaction to disclose your source obligations, and provide a download linke (via the confirmation email, or the web form you sign up with, etc).
I certainly don't read it as being required to disclose to users via a hypothetical primarily machine-read interaction protocol, nor must you do it every single machine-read transaction with the the user.
For the AGPL to be truly difficult to use it would need to be a public facing anonymous service with a standardized protocol that wasn't web based, and where the user provided their own client.
So..the AGPL isn't much good for public DNS and DHCP servers. What else?
In any case I don't think anyone who created the license really wanted or expected the AGPL to be contorted into those scenarios anyway. It was aimed squarely at the multitude of web-based SaaS stuff.
It's basically just a conventional USB connector with a big blob of silicone applied inside.
That won't corrode, short, or ever leak? Even after the stress of having a charging cord attached and detached daily for a few years, the odd drop, and probably the odd drop-and-swing-from-the-usb-cord too.
Look, I know it can be done, but you've got to agree that waterproofing an electrically live hole is going to be harder and less reliable than not having a hole in the first place.
It's also make getting the phone apart without destroying it even harder.
Given the percentage of phones that need to be taken apart due to water damage, or charging port damage eliminating them would dramatically reduce the need to take them apart.
All that leaves as common failure points is the outer glass, and inner LCD and battery. The glass can trivially be outside the membrane so that's a non-issue.
the battery and screen -- yeah, you'll have to break the membrane to replace those, but in practice, so what.
If after you bleed the LCD, and have it serviced, or 2-3 years down the road you have the battery swapped out its not guaranteed to be a waterproof phone anymore. (in practice, technicians should be able to re-seal it pretty good -- water isn't likely to even penetrate the outer case since there aren't any giant holes - aka usb ports )
Still seems worth it to me.
Sometimes people do have to go away from home for more than one day, and the charging pad takes valuable space in the bag.
A standard for charging pads resolves that for a lot of people.
But as I've said before, its a tradeoff I'm willing to make for a waterproof phone. I don't really object to there being usb phones on the market so you can have what you want, but I don't want USB as a legal requirement because that will force charging pad phones to needlessly have a hole in them.