Thieves do care about the motivation of the owner's choice of color more than the color itself. The reason why they don't steal pink cars is that they stick out and are quickly spotted. Were it to become the dominant color it would be stolen far more frequently than it is now. Thieves like Black and grey cars simply because they blend in to the background. It's a stupid suggestion by the summary that it has to do with the luxurious look, that's bullshit, thieves choose based upon what's easy, profitable and available. It's no surprise that they choose the ones that blend into the background first.
The light gun doesn't work on TVs that aren't CRTs. Not sure why, but it seems to not matter whether it's the original or a clone, but they seem to all have that problem.
Um, when they're done well they do indeed. Prototype, Batman; Arkham Asyllum and Assassin's Creed II all have in depth stories and both seem to have done quite well for themselves, Batman even winning the GOTY. It really depends upon how well the story is thought through and how well they manage to weave it into the game.
Often times if it smells there's something wrong. It doesn't apply to genuine fanbois, but frequently when a study seems incredible it's because the study was done incorrectly. Which is easy to do a minor shift in wording can get an entirely different result. In this case I doubt very much that Android users are that unloyal, it's just kind of hard to know since it's still in development and isn't as well defined as what an iPhone is.
Not necessarily. I don't have anything like that online. Mainly because I've practiced discretion. I've been to my share of parties in college and spent an entire week stoned out of my mind, but I had the judgment to do it where photos weren't a realistic possibility. Consequently despite my numerous indiscretions, none of them is available online because there is no authoritative source of information. Even a he said she said would be beyond unlikely.
I wish I had mod points available, that's probably the most insightful thing said in this whole thread. I think it's always interesting how screwing up ones body with excesses in drink and partying is somehow more acceptable than enjoying things that aren't known to be damaging to the body.
I'd chock it up to the fact that drugs are not something which people with a healthy, fulfilling life do. I'm sure some libertarian is going to argue that it is essential liberty, but it's really not. People wouldn't take the risk of drugs screwing up their lives if they were living a life that they really valued. Papering over that with drugs really isn't something that's going to change that.
But, it does. It's one thing to toss back a couple cold ones from time to time and quite another to be engaging in regular drug use. I didn't used to appreciate drug testing, but then it occurred to me that I really don't want to have to pick up slack for somebody that's not taking things seriously. If you really think that drugs have no impact on work life you really aren't very well informed. At bare minimum it's affecting ones sleep and the ability to concentrate, beyond that there's plenty that can go wrong when one is somewhat less than careful about it. I've seen what individuals that do drugs are like, and it definitely has an impact.
Beyond that drugs don't have a constructive use in society. At best they're benign and at worst they cause a lot of damage to people not directly involved.
They were trying to use it in Afghanistan, but it wasn't really working very well. Mainly because of the caves. Ultimately it proved less useful than good old fashioned snitches.
Of course it's possible, it's just a question of whether or not we're ever able to do it effectively. For something to be invisible, you have to have the photons divert around it then converge at the other end as if they hadn't just diverted. That would make something invisible, the practice however is not easy by any reasonable stretch of the imagination.
It's effectively a moot point as they aren't going to know about such back ups unless you're definitely violating copyright law. Meaning that they have no way of knowing if you make the copy, only if you distribute said copy over the net, or download as a substitute for backing up. Consequently, I doubt very much that it's going to be litigated at this point, except for third party providers of technology specifically to back up the materials.
Doubtful, that would only happen if the DVD is a license and not a copy. What you can however do is copy DVDs for back up. And that's more what the sort of thing this ruling speaks to.
Copyright doesn't cover that. Any copies necessary to use a authorized copy are deemed to be non-infringing. That includes copies in RAM. The reason why you need a license is that companies distribute their products contingent on agreeing to the license. No agreement no authorization to use the copy. It's kind of a bastardization of copyright as you're not supposed to give the copy away before working out the agreement. But it's not as bad as MS and the ever changing EULAs.
Not necessarily, we assume in the western world that it's a one dimensional timeline. But even with one dimension, there's no particular reason why it can't be a bent dimension leading back to itself or looking sort of like a mobius strip.
And why do bankers do so? It's because they aren't ignoring it, they're just not passing it on because they don't have to. Banks reach a peak economy of scale at around $100 billion, beyond that there's little advantage to be had in terms of efficiency. They grow beyond that so that they can have the leverage to hold back more of the profits. I'm guessing that the same applies here as well.
That's not an accurate analogy. When I go out to buy coffee, the coffee doesn't cost $2, but unless you're buying from a squatter, they've got other expenses. Electricity, rent, wages, heating, taxes and such, the actual cost of the food is one of the cheapest parts of the equation.
Those big backpack radios they used in Vietnam were usually leftovers from WWII. They weren't big because they needed to be, they were big because the government wasn't funding new ones. And break downs were a serious problem. The ones my dad used were capable of sending a signal clear around the world, which could cause problems if he wasn't mindful of it.
Back in the late 90s, I was working in the back country, the radio we used was about the size of a late 80s cell phone and it had plenty of power to get in touch, even in the middle of a valley. No need to get anything more than that. Unfortunately, I can't recall the specifics, but they are the ones that were used by the forest service and various state agencies in the back country.
That's not an accurate portrayal. For all intents and purposes digital and film are the same as far as the end product goes. In fact the local camera shop develops them the same way. There's a step where they transfer the digital image onto real film, but after that the whole process is exactly the same. These days you don't even need to do that because printers have gotten to the point where they're superior to film prints.
But more than that, since the end product of painting is so much different than alternatives, there's always going to be a market. Film cameras just don't do anything that's different enough from digital to guarantee that to be the case.
That's what ZFS is for, with self healing and the scrubbing you know when things are going bad. You still need a back up, but you still have that possibilities whereas it's difficult to make proper backups of physical media.
Because it doesn't happen. It's an extremely rare person that ends up the head of an organization without being a psychopath. Ever notice the behavior of CEOs? Justifying the ridiculously huge pay packages because other CEOs get it? And worse are the ones that demand it even when they're not anywhere near average. Most well adjusted people just don't want to be the head, the higher up you go past the low levels of management the worse it gets.
And yet, free projects like OpenBSD have so many fewer security problems. I have a really, really hard time grasping on what level MS is doing a good job. They typically refuse to acknowledge bugs until they've patched them and insist upon releasing them on patch Tuesdays without giving responsible end users the ability to patch up as soon as the patch is tested.
Yeah, that's a description of a competent organization. Perhaps if things are that complicated they should be removing things like WiMP and IE which have no place in the base system to focus on making things be actually secure.
Slashdot Mirror
Thieves do care about the motivation of the owner's choice of color more than the color itself. The reason why they don't steal pink cars is that they stick out and are quickly spotted. Were it to become the dominant color it would be stolen far more frequently than it is now. Thieves like Black and grey cars simply because they blend in to the background. It's a stupid suggestion by the summary that it has to do with the luxurious look, that's bullshit, thieves choose based upon what's easy, profitable and available. It's no surprise that they choose the ones that blend into the background first.
How did they know? I mean I played a lot of those games and never hit online at all. Which would make it a tad bit difficult for them to really track.
The light gun doesn't work on TVs that aren't CRTs. Not sure why, but it seems to not matter whether it's the original or a clone, but they seem to all have that problem.
Um, when they're done well they do indeed. Prototype, Batman; Arkham Asyllum and Assassin's Creed II all have in depth stories and both seem to have done quite well for themselves, Batman even winning the GOTY. It really depends upon how well the story is thought through and how well they manage to weave it into the game.
Often times if it smells there's something wrong. It doesn't apply to genuine fanbois, but frequently when a study seems incredible it's because the study was done incorrectly. Which is easy to do a minor shift in wording can get an entirely different result. In this case I doubt very much that Android users are that unloyal, it's just kind of hard to know since it's still in development and isn't as well defined as what an iPhone is.
I think you mean Astrology class, and yes, yes it should be.
Mark Twain also felt that instead of sending missionaries to Africa that we should be sending them to the South.
Not necessarily. I don't have anything like that online. Mainly because I've practiced discretion. I've been to my share of parties in college and spent an entire week stoned out of my mind, but I had the judgment to do it where photos weren't a realistic possibility. Consequently despite my numerous indiscretions, none of them is available online because there is no authoritative source of information. Even a he said she said would be beyond unlikely.
I wish I had mod points available, that's probably the most insightful thing said in this whole thread. I think it's always interesting how screwing up ones body with excesses in drink and partying is somehow more acceptable than enjoying things that aren't known to be damaging to the body.
I'd chock it up to the fact that drugs are not something which people with a healthy, fulfilling life do. I'm sure some libertarian is going to argue that it is essential liberty, but it's really not. People wouldn't take the risk of drugs screwing up their lives if they were living a life that they really valued. Papering over that with drugs really isn't something that's going to change that.
But, it does. It's one thing to toss back a couple cold ones from time to time and quite another to be engaging in regular drug use. I didn't used to appreciate drug testing, but then it occurred to me that I really don't want to have to pick up slack for somebody that's not taking things seriously. If you really think that drugs have no impact on work life you really aren't very well informed. At bare minimum it's affecting ones sleep and the ability to concentrate, beyond that there's plenty that can go wrong when one is somewhat less than careful about it. I've seen what individuals that do drugs are like, and it definitely has an impact.
Beyond that drugs don't have a constructive use in society. At best they're benign and at worst they cause a lot of damage to people not directly involved.
They were trying to use it in Afghanistan, but it wasn't really working very well. Mainly because of the caves. Ultimately it proved less useful than good old fashioned snitches.
Of course it's possible, it's just a question of whether or not we're ever able to do it effectively. For something to be invisible, you have to have the photons divert around it then converge at the other end as if they hadn't just diverted. That would make something invisible, the practice however is not easy by any reasonable stretch of the imagination.
Citation needed as copyright law specifically exempts such copies from consideration.
It's effectively a moot point as they aren't going to know about such back ups unless you're definitely violating copyright law. Meaning that they have no way of knowing if you make the copy, only if you distribute said copy over the net, or download as a substitute for backing up. Consequently, I doubt very much that it's going to be litigated at this point, except for third party providers of technology specifically to back up the materials.
Citation needed, copies to RAM are not counted as copying for the purposes of copyright law in the US.
Doubtful, that would only happen if the DVD is a license and not a copy. What you can however do is copy DVDs for back up. And that's more what the sort of thing this ruling speaks to.
Copyright doesn't cover that. Any copies necessary to use a authorized copy are deemed to be non-infringing. That includes copies in RAM. The reason why you need a license is that companies distribute their products contingent on agreeing to the license. No agreement no authorization to use the copy. It's kind of a bastardization of copyright as you're not supposed to give the copy away before working out the agreement. But it's not as bad as MS and the ever changing EULAs.
Not necessarily, we assume in the western world that it's a one dimensional timeline. But even with one dimension, there's no particular reason why it can't be a bent dimension leading back to itself or looking sort of like a mobius strip.
And why do bankers do so? It's because they aren't ignoring it, they're just not passing it on because they don't have to. Banks reach a peak economy of scale at around $100 billion, beyond that there's little advantage to be had in terms of efficiency. They grow beyond that so that they can have the leverage to hold back more of the profits. I'm guessing that the same applies here as well.
That's not an accurate analogy. When I go out to buy coffee, the coffee doesn't cost $2, but unless you're buying from a squatter, they've got other expenses. Electricity, rent, wages, heating, taxes and such, the actual cost of the food is one of the cheapest parts of the equation.
Those big backpack radios they used in Vietnam were usually leftovers from WWII. They weren't big because they needed to be, they were big because the government wasn't funding new ones. And break downs were a serious problem. The ones my dad used were capable of sending a signal clear around the world, which could cause problems if he wasn't mindful of it.
Back in the late 90s, I was working in the back country, the radio we used was about the size of a late 80s cell phone and it had plenty of power to get in touch, even in the middle of a valley. No need to get anything more than that. Unfortunately, I can't recall the specifics, but they are the ones that were used by the forest service and various state agencies in the back country.
That's not an accurate portrayal. For all intents and purposes digital and film are the same as far as the end product goes. In fact the local camera shop develops them the same way. There's a step where they transfer the digital image onto real film, but after that the whole process is exactly the same. These days you don't even need to do that because printers have gotten to the point where they're superior to film prints.
But more than that, since the end product of painting is so much different than alternatives, there's always going to be a market. Film cameras just don't do anything that's different enough from digital to guarantee that to be the case.
That's what ZFS is for, with self healing and the scrubbing you know when things are going bad. You still need a back up, but you still have that possibilities whereas it's difficult to make proper backups of physical media.
Because it doesn't happen. It's an extremely rare person that ends up the head of an organization without being a psychopath. Ever notice the behavior of CEOs? Justifying the ridiculously huge pay packages because other CEOs get it? And worse are the ones that demand it even when they're not anywhere near average. Most well adjusted people just don't want to be the head, the higher up you go past the low levels of management the worse it gets.
And yet, free projects like OpenBSD have so many fewer security problems. I have a really, really hard time grasping on what level MS is doing a good job. They typically refuse to acknowledge bugs until they've patched them and insist upon releasing them on patch Tuesdays without giving responsible end users the ability to patch up as soon as the patch is tested.
Yeah, that's a description of a competent organization. Perhaps if things are that complicated they should be removing things like WiMP and IE which have no place in the base system to focus on making things be actually secure.