You've got that backwards, the BSA has to prove that the software isn't properly licensed. If they can't prove that the license keys aren't likely to be legit they don't have anything.
The difference is that you can see the cameras in the store as you walk in, you don't necessarily get to see the tracking mechanisms when you browse the web.
Precisely, if people were paying the taxes that the politicians had in mind when they were writing the budget we'd be in a much stronger position. It doesn't necessarily mean that we wouldn't need more service cuts or tax increases, but it would at least ensure that the budgets could be relied upon. As it stands budgets are passed in the dark and nobody really knows what the ultimate result will be because nobody really knows how much revenue is going to be lost to loopholes and corporate thievery.
The GOP for decades has advocated for balancing budgets with tax revenue increases that supposedly would come from increased receipts as a result of a growing economy. It's never worked for prolonged periods of time and I can't personally imagine how one could rely upon that as a basis for decreasing taxes and increasing spending.
At this point we do mostly need service cuts, but we also need some new revenue because there's a lot of programs which can't be cut and are more expensive than what we can afford with our current tax system. Things like welfare are most needed when our tax receipts are the lowest and we can't just pullout of our military engagements immediately without repercussions.
If you don't receive a response the chances are good that you can just blacklist the domain. Legitimate domains typically have somebody that's going to respond to those sorts of emails, the exceptions being cases where it's a personal domain that got hijacked, in either case you can black list it and if they really need to get in touch they can get a free email address elsewhere until the black list is lifted.
Not really, by that logic somebody could have patented fire rather than the process of making it. If I accidentally held a magnifying glass at the right angle I could accidentally discover how to create fire, but the lens method would be the part that could be patented, not the light and not the result. I could also possibly patent the lens if it hadn't already been patented.
But, in this case, the lens doesn't exist naturally and as a result could theoretically be patented. A gene is a gene and if you get it from a natural source it is still a naturally occurring item.
What about in the future when somebody figures out how to invent genes? It's technologically impossible at the present, but I can definitely see folks figuring out how to do that, predicting the outcome would be challenging.
But, what happens if somebody invents a gene that already exists but is not yet discovered? Would they be able to sue the offending organisms for infringement.
And yes, this is a slippery slope and not yet inevitable, but I do wonder if this isn't the direction we're headed.
Eventually the whole sum might hit the economy. They'd just be creating this so that they could pay their bills. It's a subtlety that a lot of folks don't seem to get. Just authorizing a rise in the debt ceiling isn't going to cause problems if there are spending cuts or tax hikes we might not hit that limit.
Same goes for this, if the deficit shrinks and reverses it's well within the realm of possibility that the whole sum wouldn't ever be used. Which of course is fantasy because we can't balance the budget without some new revenue and the Tea party hobbits won't allow that to happen.
Only at that point, just having the coin in a vault does nothing to inflation. But, as the government borrows against it the inflation would start to occur just like if the debt ceiling was raised as more bonds were auctioned off.
DirecTV has some means of magically getting their data to the end users ISP? Because that's the only way in which they can do that without paying for it.
I'm not paying for an average amount of data, at least that's not the basis upon which my ISP marketed the connection. Like I said, this is just further evidence that the government needs to step in and stop the fraudulent advertising that's leading to these head aches.
This isn't fundamentally any different from food processors that provide less food in a given container for the same price and then claim that consumers wouldn't like a price increase. Well, it is a price increase, there's less food for the same money, the cost per unit has suddenly gone up.
Not quite, it would only increase inflation if it hit the economy. The effect of having a $5tn coin to borrow against would be more or less identical to issuing another $5tn in bonds. This is just a loophole of sorts the effect on the economy would be mostly the same, although it probably would make the price of platinum spike if they actually went through with trying to mint a $5tn coin.
Do you have any actual evidence of that? Or are you just repeating GOP talking points. The reason I ask is that everything I've read suggests that working in the public sector typically pays significantly less than what the private sector would offer.
SQL isn't an acronym, it's just a series of three letters that get pronounced as such. It's not fundamentally any different than FBI, FDA or DSHS in that respect.
That's not unlimited. If they place any limits beyond what the technology allows it's no longer unlimited. Nobody really thinks that they can download a gazillion gb per month on an unlimited plan, but the ISP shouldn't be prioritizing, throttling or any of that on an unlimited plan.
This isn't interesting it's complete bullshit. I pay my ISP to provide the bandwidth and Youtube pays their ISP to provide bandwidth, the bandwidth has been paid for. I don't get money off my bill at the end of the month if my ISP was able to serve me up a cached version, so why on Earth should the ISP get to cheat me like that?
From your post the take home message here is that we need more regulation to clamp down on ISPs' and their fraudulent advertising practices. If they can't provide the advertised speed then they shouldn't be pretending to offer it, it's just that simple.
I've definitely noticed that. From time to time my cell won't even ring and the first indication that I've got a call is 15 minutes later when I glance at my phone. If I lived in a rural area I could sort of understand that, but I live in a major city and I never had that problem with Sprint.
I see our resident troll is putting up some more copy pasta.
You do realize that the original telecommunications monopoly was created on purpose specifically because it was the only way to ensure that there was enough money to build out the infrastructure, right? I guess the other alternatives having none and government ownership were even less palatable at the time.
If you don't believe in natural monopolies, then how precisely do you explain the tendencies of corporations to buy out the competitors or run them out of business? I'm curious as to why it's in the best interest of any corporation to tolerate competitors without regulators telling them to.
Frame free is nice, but doesn't that carry with it all the same disadvantages that vector graphics did?
Re:Does anyone really like 3D?
on
Beyond HDTV
·
· Score: 1
The technology is getting closer and closer with each iteration. They've gotten to the point where they can film it in real time for sporting events, the big issue at the moment is the display technology. But, if you look at the success that Nintendo had with the 3Ds in terms of displaying a 3D image we should be getting closer to the point where it's a viable option.
The other issue is that nobody really knows how to use it properly. Film hasn't really evolved past the point of using it for a cheap thrill.
Adult stem cells have been researched primarily because funding was limited for embryonic stem cell lines and the lines that were eligible for funding were limited to a small number of lines. It might be that adult stem cells work better, but it's really not valid to suggest that it's the case when the research using embryonic stem cells has been effectively thwarted by a bunch of pro-life nutters.
As for the climate change models, refusing to fund the research does not change the reality. This is a bit like standing in a field with a tornado coming with your fingers in your ears going "nananananananananananananananananananana" Sure the models aren't perfect, but prettending like the preponderance of the evidence isn't what it is because it's inconvenient is just plain bullshit. If you don't believe the research is largely factual then go out and do some more research to disprove it. Cutting funding does nothing for getting to the bottom of it.
I'm guessing it's a libertarian or a climate change skeptical. It's unfortunate because if it's indeed true that CO2 isn't as big of an issue as previously thought the time we've spent going down less productive avenues could have been spent on figuring out more effective ways of solving the problem.
Which is significantly more likely if you've got a common name as you'll be contending with not just the people with that common name, but with those with rare names that don't want folks tracking them all over the place.
Yes, but there are plenty of parts of the US where posting an unpopular position can lead to you not being offered work and effectively frozen out of the housing market.
Not to mention what happens when there's a significant shift in public opinion back the other way.
Yes and no, it's a medium ground between fully opening the source code and keeping the APIs shut, but I'm not really sure how this differs from typical APIs where the programmer knows what the API is but doesn't necessarily know how any of it is accomplished internally.
If this is truly the case you can pretty much just blame the skeptics for it. We could have reached this conclusion much earlier had they not been making jack asses of themselves and standing in the way of research.
Similar for stem cell research, putting up roadblocks to research doesn't change reality, it does however slow the process of determining the truth.
Slashdot Mirror
You've got that backwards, the BSA has to prove that the software isn't properly licensed. If they can't prove that the license keys aren't likely to be legit they don't have anything.
The difference is that you can see the cameras in the store as you walk in, you don't necessarily get to see the tracking mechanisms when you browse the web.
Precisely, if people were paying the taxes that the politicians had in mind when they were writing the budget we'd be in a much stronger position. It doesn't necessarily mean that we wouldn't need more service cuts or tax increases, but it would at least ensure that the budgets could be relied upon. As it stands budgets are passed in the dark and nobody really knows what the ultimate result will be because nobody really knows how much revenue is going to be lost to loopholes and corporate thievery.
The GOP for decades has advocated for balancing budgets with tax revenue increases that supposedly would come from increased receipts as a result of a growing economy. It's never worked for prolonged periods of time and I can't personally imagine how one could rely upon that as a basis for decreasing taxes and increasing spending.
At this point we do mostly need service cuts, but we also need some new revenue because there's a lot of programs which can't be cut and are more expensive than what we can afford with our current tax system. Things like welfare are most needed when our tax receipts are the lowest and we can't just pullout of our military engagements immediately without repercussions.
If you don't receive a response the chances are good that you can just blacklist the domain. Legitimate domains typically have somebody that's going to respond to those sorts of emails, the exceptions being cases where it's a personal domain that got hijacked, in either case you can black list it and if they really need to get in touch they can get a free email address elsewhere until the black list is lifted.
Not really, by that logic somebody could have patented fire rather than the process of making it. If I accidentally held a magnifying glass at the right angle I could accidentally discover how to create fire, but the lens method would be the part that could be patented, not the light and not the result. I could also possibly patent the lens if it hadn't already been patented.
But, in this case, the lens doesn't exist naturally and as a result could theoretically be patented. A gene is a gene and if you get it from a natural source it is still a naturally occurring item.
What about in the future when somebody figures out how to invent genes? It's technologically impossible at the present, but I can definitely see folks figuring out how to do that, predicting the outcome would be challenging.
But, what happens if somebody invents a gene that already exists but is not yet discovered? Would they be able to sue the offending organisms for infringement.
And yes, this is a slippery slope and not yet inevitable, but I do wonder if this isn't the direction we're headed.
Eventually the whole sum might hit the economy. They'd just be creating this so that they could pay their bills. It's a subtlety that a lot of folks don't seem to get. Just authorizing a rise in the debt ceiling isn't going to cause problems if there are spending cuts or tax hikes we might not hit that limit.
Same goes for this, if the deficit shrinks and reverses it's well within the realm of possibility that the whole sum wouldn't ever be used. Which of course is fantasy because we can't balance the budget without some new revenue and the Tea party hobbits won't allow that to happen.
Only at that point, just having the coin in a vault does nothing to inflation. But, as the government borrows against it the inflation would start to occur just like if the debt ceiling was raised as more bonds were auctioned off.
DirecTV has some means of magically getting their data to the end users ISP? Because that's the only way in which they can do that without paying for it.
I'm not paying for an average amount of data, at least that's not the basis upon which my ISP marketed the connection. Like I said, this is just further evidence that the government needs to step in and stop the fraudulent advertising that's leading to these head aches.
This isn't fundamentally any different from food processors that provide less food in a given container for the same price and then claim that consumers wouldn't like a price increase. Well, it is a price increase, there's less food for the same money, the cost per unit has suddenly gone up.
Not quite, it would only increase inflation if it hit the economy. The effect of having a $5tn coin to borrow against would be more or less identical to issuing another $5tn in bonds. This is just a loophole of sorts the effect on the economy would be mostly the same, although it probably would make the price of platinum spike if they actually went through with trying to mint a $5tn coin.
Do you have any actual evidence of that? Or are you just repeating GOP talking points. The reason I ask is that everything I've read suggests that working in the public sector typically pays significantly less than what the private sector would offer.
SQL isn't an acronym, it's just a series of three letters that get pronounced as such. It's not fundamentally any different than FBI, FDA or DSHS in that respect.
That's not unlimited. If they place any limits beyond what the technology allows it's no longer unlimited. Nobody really thinks that they can download a gazillion gb per month on an unlimited plan, but the ISP shouldn't be prioritizing, throttling or any of that on an unlimited plan.
This isn't interesting it's complete bullshit. I pay my ISP to provide the bandwidth and Youtube pays their ISP to provide bandwidth, the bandwidth has been paid for. I don't get money off my bill at the end of the month if my ISP was able to serve me up a cached version, so why on Earth should the ISP get to cheat me like that?
From your post the take home message here is that we need more regulation to clamp down on ISPs' and their fraudulent advertising practices. If they can't provide the advertised speed then they shouldn't be pretending to offer it, it's just that simple.
I've definitely noticed that. From time to time my cell won't even ring and the first indication that I've got a call is 15 minutes later when I glance at my phone. If I lived in a rural area I could sort of understand that, but I live in a major city and I never had that problem with Sprint.
I see our resident troll is putting up some more copy pasta.
You do realize that the original telecommunications monopoly was created on purpose specifically because it was the only way to ensure that there was enough money to build out the infrastructure, right? I guess the other alternatives having none and government ownership were even less palatable at the time.
If you don't believe in natural monopolies, then how precisely do you explain the tendencies of corporations to buy out the competitors or run them out of business? I'm curious as to why it's in the best interest of any corporation to tolerate competitors without regulators telling them to.
Frame free is nice, but doesn't that carry with it all the same disadvantages that vector graphics did?
The technology is getting closer and closer with each iteration. They've gotten to the point where they can film it in real time for sporting events, the big issue at the moment is the display technology. But, if you look at the success that Nintendo had with the 3Ds in terms of displaying a 3D image we should be getting closer to the point where it's a viable option.
The other issue is that nobody really knows how to use it properly. Film hasn't really evolved past the point of using it for a cheap thrill.
Adult stem cells have been researched primarily because funding was limited for embryonic stem cell lines and the lines that were eligible for funding were limited to a small number of lines. It might be that adult stem cells work better, but it's really not valid to suggest that it's the case when the research using embryonic stem cells has been effectively thwarted by a bunch of pro-life nutters.
As for the climate change models, refusing to fund the research does not change the reality. This is a bit like standing in a field with a tornado coming with your fingers in your ears going "nananananananananananananananananananana" Sure the models aren't perfect, but prettending like the preponderance of the evidence isn't what it is because it's inconvenient is just plain bullshit. If you don't believe the research is largely factual then go out and do some more research to disprove it. Cutting funding does nothing for getting to the bottom of it.
I'm guessing it's a libertarian or a climate change skeptical. It's unfortunate because if it's indeed true that CO2 isn't as big of an issue as previously thought the time we've spent going down less productive avenues could have been spent on figuring out more effective ways of solving the problem.
Easy, just drink out of blue cups and you should be fine. Blue cups mean that whatever liquid is in it must be non-alcoholic.
Which is significantly more likely if you've got a common name as you'll be contending with not just the people with that common name, but with those with rare names that don't want folks tracking them all over the place.
Yes, but there are plenty of parts of the US where posting an unpopular position can lead to you not being offered work and effectively frozen out of the housing market.
Not to mention what happens when there's a significant shift in public opinion back the other way.
Yes and no, it's a medium ground between fully opening the source code and keeping the APIs shut, but I'm not really sure how this differs from typical APIs where the programmer knows what the API is but doesn't necessarily know how any of it is accomplished internally.
If this is truly the case you can pretty much just blame the skeptics for it. We could have reached this conclusion much earlier had they not been making jack asses of themselves and standing in the way of research.
Similar for stem cell research, putting up roadblocks to research doesn't change reality, it does however slow the process of determining the truth.