Actually in those terms, firearms are more frequently used for suicide than for self defense. The kind of scenario that you're suggesting is vastly out numbered by suicides. Admittedly it does leave out other legal uses like hunting and target practice, but it is pretty clear that firearms for self defense is counterproductive at best.
That is precisely why it must die. Nobody, should ever, under any circumstance be emailing Word documents around. IT professionals have been trying to kill that for years with good reason.
If you absolutely must do that sort of thing, you shouldn't be using anything other than either RTF or ODF, and the only reason there's a question is that ODF isn't as widely supported. Just because you and your associates can't figure out how to use the alternatives does not mean that the alternatives are unacceptable, it just means that you couldn't figure it out. OO.org does have some problems, I don't think there's a point to lying, but in terms of writing, formatting, reviewing and such, it does a perfectly fine job of that with a couple minor exceptions which don't really show up that often. Well, assuming that one isn't emailing around formats which shouldn't be emailed.
But in all seriousness, Word is not a good text processor, it's not even a mediocre text processor. Mainly because that's not what it was designed for, I don't recall ever seeing an ad that was pushing the kind of functionality that vi has, even if you do mix in the keyboard. What Word is meant for is to be a WYSIWYG text editor, not to knock that type of application, but that's not the same thing as a text processor.
But beyond that, Word isn't terribly good at what it does. A lot of that comes down to the lack of sane engineering on the part of MS. A lot of the features are hidden deep within the UI and sometimes you have to really know your way around the program to fix some pretty fundamental problems. I remember spending quite a bit of time one time trying to figure out how to turn off autocorrect. And there's a tendency for MS to reshuffle the whole UI frequently enough that one wonders why bother to learn about the deeper inner workings when chances are they'll change significantly with the next release.
Not really, cyclists hate everybody else because they tend to be self righteous pricks. Drivers hate cyclists because they're self righteous pricks that don't obey the traffic laws. Never noticed Drivers or motorcyclists hating each other. Pedestrians hate all the rest of them because of the lack of respect and danger that the others represent.
And everybody hates Taxis because, let's be honest, they have a tendency to drive too fast and with too little consideration for those around them.
Somehow the fact that you refer to pirated music as "warez" makes me somewhat skeptical that you have ever actually done so. Warez is the term for cracked software, not music.
That aside, streaming music services are at least as bad as the ITMS and similar services for the music industry. Back prior to all that hogwash you were pretty limited in your ability to buy music in single track increments. Sure you could get a single, but you couldn't buy 8 out of 11 songs, and if you wanted a song which wasn't as popular you were stuck with buying the album.
These days, that's not how it's done, you only have to listen to the songs you like without ever having paid for the rest of the tracks. I'm sure that sounds good in theory. But take a look back at previous albums, I doubt most people would've really appreciated the higher quality of Nirvana's Nevermind over their later In Utero, worse in a sense is that if you clip off the non-music from In Utero it's would seem like a better period of work. As things are done more and more like that there is less and less incentive to spread the effort out, rather than focusing on a quality album experience to justify buying the album, that time and money tends to get funneled into a couple of tracks.
That and the generally poor production quality of so many albums pretty much insures that quality music is going to be much harder to come by than it has been in the past. If we get really lucky, all of this will be largely neutralized by the increasing easy of independent groups getting exposure and producing their own work without the suits.
I don't know where you live, but that sort of thing is probably not enforceable here. That would be a pretty blatant violation of state law governing how contracts may be interpreted. In order to win the case the college would have to demonstrate that they had made it sufficiently clear what they were asking for and that there was a meeting of the minds over it.
Courts around here tend to frown on easter egg hunts in contracts, particularly those that include references to other documents and where one couldn't reasonably be expected to understand the whole thing.
Technically speaking the professors aren't doing their jobs if they're duplicating work in different courses. If you take two different classes the course material is supposed to be different. It's really the duty of the professors involved not to waste students time in that manner. I'm sure it happens every once in a while with generic what did you do over the summer assignments, but for the most part they shouldn't be assigning duplicate homework like that.
Colleges may believe that, but I don't think that would stand up in court. You're paying them tuition and fees in order to get credits and hopefully a degree. The papers belong to the student as the student is the only one with the legal right to redistribute the papers. Now, there may be some whining about it being scholastic dishonesty to do so, but it's the right of the owner of the copyrighted information to redistribute it.
I don't think that the colleges are buying the work as part of a trade for the degree is something which college students are ever informed about or required to agree to. I certainly don't recall anybody asking me about that nor do I remember signing anything that gave them the rights to my work. There are exceptions in grad school for that sort of thing, but in those cases it's typically pretty clear, research done in grad school is typically owned by whomever it was that paid for it to be conducted.
That's because there isn't really any point to turnitin other than sloth. I remember talking to some of the faculty when I was in college about that, and the reality is that while some people are subtle about it, that takes a lot of work to plagiarize in a way that's difficult to detect. Most of the time it's more or less self evident and googling a couple of those sentences will reveal the cheating.
Interesting, so truth is a defense, but there is no legal right to not be executed for a crime that one is known to be innocent of. Excuse me for thinking that that's more than a little bit fucked up.
Of course this is civil so we have a ways to go before it becomes a capital crime. Which now that I think of it is a bit ironic since RIAA essentially accused him of a crime against capital.
That's sort of what I've been wondering. If the people that are opposed to the RIAA's egregious behavior give him money for this, isn't this more or less the same thing as donating money to the RIAA? If I'm going to give them money, I'd like to at least get some decent music out of it.
And presumably those that do support the RIAA as ignorant as they are wouldn't be contributing either.
Wrong, that's not entrapment. Entrapment is tricking somebody into committing a crime so that you can arrest them for that. This isn't really any different than when the FBI breaks into the home of a suspected mafioso and installs a hardware key logger or remotely installs a trojan. The person will commit or not commit crimes as if the investigation weren't taking place and as such there would be no entrapment.
That's valid to a point, but ultimately anything that's been devised thus far can be cracked an exploited, the whole point of encryption is to make the process take so ungodly long that the utility of the information to the attacker is eliminated.
Which doesn't necessarily mean that you need the highest bit rate for every task, if you're just wanting to secure a connection for a OTP the amount of encryption is pretty minimal, if you're needing to use the same cert for many connections then you'd want and need a much higher quality encryption.
Apart from itemization, that stuff is already dealt with. At least in states which require power company buy backs. The cost of that distribution and equipment is already factored into the price of electricity. The fee is strictly for the meter service since it requires equipment and resources not normally required.
Typically the way it works now is that you pay a small fee to the electric company for their services in keeping track of the electricity that you use and what you sell to them. I think it's usually something like $5.
Assuming that one is in a part of the country which requires companies to buy the electricity back they first credit you for the power you provide against the power you use when the sun is down and then they're supposed to bill/credit you for any differences. Those transactions already include any costs from transmission and distribution and such.
Not particularly, the joke is that the characters were just not going to be able to speak. Or apparently eat, so I guess that means it would've been a short lived return.
Of course having explained the joke, it's now ruined. In other news, why didn't somebody negate the goodnewseveryone tag? Strikes me as somebody that didn't really get the show trying to demonstrate knowledge.
It's not about PC it's about the endless reinforcement of a eugenically pure gaming experience. The problem isn't that a particular game doesn't have any diversity, the problem is that most of them don't. It serves to reinforce general stereotypes and resistance people have to tolerance.
Or in other words it's not the fact that particular games don't have minorities as major characters, it's the games aren't being made which reasonably require minorities and the social harm that it does.
This is different, somehow, from the actual people out there with very real sensitivities to EM radiation. Sure it's not an allergy, but people tend to misuse the term allergy when they mean sensitivity and the main reason to be skeptical of WiFi sensitivities is due to the low power of them.
WiFi, I'm not sure many people claim that, but as somebody that's been completely unable to enter the TV section of department stores for quite some time due to a similar sensitivity, I think it's incredibly arrogant to suggest that people aren't affected by electromagnetic radiation. In some parts of the world there's even a newer version of ECT that uses electromagnets to induce a similar affect.
The only technical reason why we use the X86 and AMD64 platforms is because it maintains backwards compatibility better. Just look at the lack of success that Intel had when they tried to break that compatibility.
It is somewhat unfortunate that we seem to be locked in like that since there isn't really much reason why we need to hold onto a lot of that old, used to be necessary, architectural cruft. Not to mention the fact that a significant number of the assumptions upon which the original architecture was built upon are no longer valid. And the sooner a switch like this is made the sooner emulation can handle the old stuff at proper full speed. Or I suppose you could just handle it the way that Apple did when they switched to Intel architecture.
Not to mention that if the US Navy can run as many nuclear powered vessels as it does without accident, they can surely handle land based ones without too much trouble.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually in those terms, firearms are more frequently used for suicide than for self defense. The kind of scenario that you're suggesting is vastly out numbered by suicides. Admittedly it does leave out other legal uses like hunting and target practice, but it is pretty clear that firearms for self defense is counterproductive at best.
Suicides Half Of Gun Deaths In US
That is precisely why it must die. Nobody, should ever, under any circumstance be emailing Word documents around. IT professionals have been trying to kill that for years with good reason.
If you absolutely must do that sort of thing, you shouldn't be using anything other than either RTF or ODF, and the only reason there's a question is that ODF isn't as widely supported. Just because you and your associates can't figure out how to use the alternatives does not mean that the alternatives are unacceptable, it just means that you couldn't figure it out. OO.org does have some problems, I don't think there's a point to lying, but in terms of writing, formatting, reviewing and such, it does a perfectly fine job of that with a couple minor exceptions which don't really show up that often. Well, assuming that one isn't emailing around formats which shouldn't be emailed.
I didn't know "vi" was pronounced "Word."
But in all seriousness, Word is not a good text processor, it's not even a mediocre text processor. Mainly because that's not what it was designed for, I don't recall ever seeing an ad that was pushing the kind of functionality that vi has, even if you do mix in the keyboard. What Word is meant for is to be a WYSIWYG text editor, not to knock that type of application, but that's not the same thing as a text processor.
But beyond that, Word isn't terribly good at what it does. A lot of that comes down to the lack of sane engineering on the part of MS. A lot of the features are hidden deep within the UI and sometimes you have to really know your way around the program to fix some pretty fundamental problems. I remember spending quite a bit of time one time trying to figure out how to turn off autocorrect. And there's a tendency for MS to reshuffle the whole UI frequently enough that one wonders why bother to learn about the deeper inner workings when chances are they'll change significantly with the next release.
Not really, cyclists hate everybody else because they tend to be self righteous pricks. Drivers hate cyclists because they're self righteous pricks that don't obey the traffic laws. Never noticed Drivers or motorcyclists hating each other. Pedestrians hate all the rest of them because of the lack of respect and danger that the others represent.
And everybody hates Taxis because, let's be honest, they have a tendency to drive too fast and with too little consideration for those around them.
Somehow the fact that you refer to pirated music as "warez" makes me somewhat skeptical that you have ever actually done so. Warez is the term for cracked software, not music.
That aside, streaming music services are at least as bad as the ITMS and similar services for the music industry. Back prior to all that hogwash you were pretty limited in your ability to buy music in single track increments. Sure you could get a single, but you couldn't buy 8 out of 11 songs, and if you wanted a song which wasn't as popular you were stuck with buying the album.
These days, that's not how it's done, you only have to listen to the songs you like without ever having paid for the rest of the tracks. I'm sure that sounds good in theory. But take a look back at previous albums, I doubt most people would've really appreciated the higher quality of Nirvana's Nevermind over their later In Utero, worse in a sense is that if you clip off the non-music from In Utero it's would seem like a better period of work. As things are done more and more like that there is less and less incentive to spread the effort out, rather than focusing on a quality album experience to justify buying the album, that time and money tends to get funneled into a couple of tracks.
That and the generally poor production quality of so many albums pretty much insures that quality music is going to be much harder to come by than it has been in the past. If we get really lucky, all of this will be largely neutralized by the increasing easy of independent groups getting exposure and producing their own work without the suits.
That machine was manufactured by Diebold you insensitive clod.
I don't know where you live, but that sort of thing is probably not enforceable here. That would be a pretty blatant violation of state law governing how contracts may be interpreted. In order to win the case the college would have to demonstrate that they had made it sufficiently clear what they were asking for and that there was a meeting of the minds over it.
Courts around here tend to frown on easter egg hunts in contracts, particularly those that include references to other documents and where one couldn't reasonably be expected to understand the whole thing.
Technically speaking the professors aren't doing their jobs if they're duplicating work in different courses. If you take two different classes the course material is supposed to be different. It's really the duty of the professors involved not to waste students time in that manner. I'm sure it happens every once in a while with generic what did you do over the summer assignments, but for the most part they shouldn't be assigning duplicate homework like that.
Colleges may believe that, but I don't think that would stand up in court. You're paying them tuition and fees in order to get credits and hopefully a degree. The papers belong to the student as the student is the only one with the legal right to redistribute the papers. Now, there may be some whining about it being scholastic dishonesty to do so, but it's the right of the owner of the copyrighted information to redistribute it.
I don't think that the colleges are buying the work as part of a trade for the degree is something which college students are ever informed about or required to agree to. I certainly don't recall anybody asking me about that nor do I remember signing anything that gave them the rights to my work. There are exceptions in grad school for that sort of thing, but in those cases it's typically pretty clear, research done in grad school is typically owned by whomever it was that paid for it to be conducted.
That's because there isn't really any point to turnitin other than sloth. I remember talking to some of the faculty when I was in college about that, and the reality is that while some people are subtle about it, that takes a lot of work to plagiarize in a way that's difficult to detect. Most of the time it's more or less self evident and googling a couple of those sentences will reveal the cheating.
Interesting, so truth is a defense, but there is no legal right to not be executed for a crime that one is known to be innocent of. Excuse me for thinking that that's more than a little bit fucked up.
Of course this is civil so we have a ways to go before it becomes a capital crime. Which now that I think of it is a bit ironic since RIAA essentially accused him of a crime against capital.
Why not? The USPS could use stimulus too.
That's sort of what I've been wondering. If the people that are opposed to the RIAA's egregious behavior give him money for this, isn't this more or less the same thing as donating money to the RIAA? If I'm going to give them money, I'd like to at least get some decent music out of it.
And presumably those that do support the RIAA as ignorant as they are wouldn't be contributing either.
Wrong, that's not entrapment. Entrapment is tricking somebody into committing a crime so that you can arrest them for that. This isn't really any different than when the FBI breaks into the home of a suspected mafioso and installs a hardware key logger or remotely installs a trojan. The person will commit or not commit crimes as if the investigation weren't taking place and as such there would be no entrapment.
That's valid to a point, but ultimately anything that's been devised thus far can be cracked an exploited, the whole point of encryption is to make the process take so ungodly long that the utility of the information to the attacker is eliminated.
Which doesn't necessarily mean that you need the highest bit rate for every task, if you're just wanting to secure a connection for a OTP the amount of encryption is pretty minimal, if you're needing to use the same cert for many connections then you'd want and need a much higher quality encryption.
Apart from itemization, that stuff is already dealt with. At least in states which require power company buy backs. The cost of that distribution and equipment is already factored into the price of electricity. The fee is strictly for the meter service since it requires equipment and resources not normally required.
Typically the way it works now is that you pay a small fee to the electric company for their services in keeping track of the electricity that you use and what you sell to them. I think it's usually something like $5.
Assuming that one is in a part of the country which requires companies to buy the electricity back they first credit you for the power you provide against the power you use when the sun is down and then they're supposed to bill/credit you for any differences. Those transactions already include any costs from transmission and distribution and such.
You mean the rule just after, leave out any and all jokes?
Not particularly, the joke is that the characters were just not going to be able to speak. Or apparently eat, so I guess that means it would've been a short lived return.
Of course having explained the joke, it's now ruined. In other news, why didn't somebody negate the goodnewseveryone tag? Strikes me as somebody that didn't really get the show trying to demonstrate knowledge.
It's not about PC it's about the endless reinforcement of a eugenically pure gaming experience. The problem isn't that a particular game doesn't have any diversity, the problem is that most of them don't. It serves to reinforce general stereotypes and resistance people have to tolerance.
Or in other words it's not the fact that particular games don't have minorities as major characters, it's the games aren't being made which reasonably require minorities and the social harm that it does.
This is different, somehow, from the actual people out there with very real sensitivities to EM radiation. Sure it's not an allergy, but people tend to misuse the term allergy when they mean sensitivity and the main reason to be skeptical of WiFi sensitivities is due to the low power of them.
WiFi, I'm not sure many people claim that, but as somebody that's been completely unable to enter the TV section of department stores for quite some time due to a similar sensitivity, I think it's incredibly arrogant to suggest that people aren't affected by electromagnetic radiation. In some parts of the world there's even a newer version of ECT that uses electromagnets to induce a similar affect.
The only technical reason why we use the X86 and AMD64 platforms is because it maintains backwards compatibility better. Just look at the lack of success that Intel had when they tried to break that compatibility.
It is somewhat unfortunate that we seem to be locked in like that since there isn't really much reason why we need to hold onto a lot of that old, used to be necessary, architectural cruft. Not to mention the fact that a significant number of the assumptions upon which the original architecture was built upon are no longer valid. And the sooner a switch like this is made the sooner emulation can handle the old stuff at proper full speed. Or I suppose you could just handle it the way that Apple did when they switched to Intel architecture.
Sort of like how iPod is now used as the generic term for MP3 player.
Not to mention that if the US Navy can run as many nuclear powered vessels as it does without accident, they can surely handle land based ones without too much trouble.