Because they were on manual backup control they could not exert enough force on the controls to recover before Vne or the flutter speed of something was attained.
I don't think you'd hit Vne that fast after an updraft-induced stall. And rather than struggle with control pressure, the flight director could have been re-engaged (though this is probably what killed Jos. Kennedy off Nantucket). I'm thinking explosive decompression from a large meteor puncture. But I don't have any special information and your hypothesis is probably as likely as mine. (I'm a commercial instrument pilot but small planes only.)
I know Apple hardware is supposed to be of high quality, and it is often argued that buying a similar-quality PC would cost as much as a Mac. But I still believe there is enough excess profit to Apple for a clone maker to offer the same quality for less money. This is probably the reason Apple will not see Quo just as a manufacturer who will help popularize their OS.
Interesting. Cheap knockoffs sully the brand, but excellent ones cannibalize sales. There may be no hope for a would-be Mac clone maker without enough capital allocated to legal defense.
Both methods have pros and cons. Which appeals to you and your budget more? Choose that one. Any clean, dry, vibration-free storage is good for removed internal drives.
people would continue to use it indefinitely, and then would expect support as well
Since when, in real terms, has MS ever provided free support of any kind in any form? Bugfixes, maybe; patches sometimes; but who in his right mind thinks he can call Microsoft for nonpaid support when there's an OS problem?
"We are very disappointed with the USTR's decision to continue to withhold these documents The president promised an open and transparent administration," said EFF Senior Counsel David Sobel.
So it looks like, if the government, even a new presidential administration in which some have hope, wants to keep the pesty people from derailing a law the administration likes, what it does is HIDE IT until it's too late for the people to be heard? Honest to God, is this America?
I suggest keep a real (and conservative, no betas, hacks) XP on D: , sparing 15 GB partition to it and use Windows 7 as main partition.
Why don't we have hypervisors of some kind or a BIOS that would let both OS's run simultaneously, essentially on the bare metal, and allow switching back and forth? (I'm sure there are technical problems I'm unaware of that make this impracticable; but given a machine with enough memory, why couldn't someone do it?)
My solution is a KVM switch and two boxes with different OSs.
As much as I'd like to believe your scenario, I think the truth is more likely the Defedants' whining that the same unproven, conclusory allegations they've seen 100 times before are about to be republished, to their harm, all over the internet. Don't get me wrong, I think those allegations are AS GOOD AS proven and must be resolved conclusively AGAINST the record companies, but they seem to make a big point in their brief supporting their motion for dismissal, or judgment on the pleadings, that no court has found as a matter of fact, after trial, that *all* of these oft-repeated allegations of misconduct are true (amounting at this stage merely to a theory of recovery). Of course, personally I believe all of the allegations of misconduct ARE true... but it's my take on what's going on.
There are already laws (in the form of mandatory tariff inclusions) that require phone companies to provide "emergency access" (a virtually no-cost line) for persons who otherwise could not summon help.
It's not a court of law and most (if not all) ISPs have the right to discountinue service to you at their whim.
This is probably not true since internet access has become akin to a public utility on which people's livelihoods depend. Is it OK to put Ted Telecommuter out of work because Ted Jr. can't be disciplined out of unauthorized downloading?
Is there anyway to defend yourself from these claims? Is there no burden of proof on the RIAA's side? Will AT&T simply punish those accused?
All of your questions have answers, which respectively, are: Yes, but it will involve an expensive lawsuit; No, not at first until enough people complain or someone sues; Yes, until enough outcry forces something like a due process standard. See the insightful post by bug (#27328451) above.
It may be noncriminal but whether it is legally remediable is another issue. The Constitution guarantees us certain rights against being deprived of any "property interest". Lawyers, lick your chops. Whether cutting off someone's internet (akin to cutting off his electricity) based on mere allegations by (or questionable Media Sentry evidence from) RIAA is deprivation of a "property interest" without compensation, due process or equal protection, or will give rise to damages will be a ripe, litigable issue.
At base and in the simplest terms, you just can't screw people without legally sufficient justification. This will include elements of equal protection and due process every time, whether state action is involved or not. In a case of sufficient gravity (internet loss more widespread than the lawsuits ever were), Charlie Nesson is going to have another great project for his Harvard law students.
If they show up, tell reception not to let them past the waiting room. Call the cops IMMEDIATELY if they won't follow your instructions or requests (your business is private property.) Fetch the highest person in the company, preferably an officer, and tell them the BSA has no legal ability to search without a warrant or court order (which requires a lawsuit) and they need to shoo them away. The BSA should get nothing but the phone number of your lawyer.
VERY bad advice. Take it from this lawyer. First, if you are a company of any size your volume licensing agreement allows them to do these audits, and you can be liable in damages for breach of contract for turning them away. But second, and MUCH more to the point, if you shoo them away THEY CAN AND WILL come back with United States Marshalls and confiscate every computer in the place. You won't even hear of their suit before this happens.
You may turn them away if they appear first without any reasonable notice, but the first order of business is to CALL YOUR LAWYER. Then make damned sure your software audit is DONE BY A LAWYER WITH SYSTEMS EXPERTISE (they exist) so the results are protected as Attorney Work Product and not DISCOVERABLE BY THE BSA. Remember, *anyone* in the company can be deposed, whether he / she worked under the direction of an attorney or not.
Step carefully. The BSA has fangs and loves to bite hard and drink LOTS of cash.
I suppose it is possible the Obama administration is paying off a promise to go after file sharers by filing a less-than-effective brief, which when it is unsuccessful will not piss off the millions and millions of file sharers.
Millions and millions. No politician can ignore millions and millions, be they voters or dollars.
Why is it that some musicians, after 10,000 hours of practice, are struggling with their day jobs, and others are mega-stars?
Gladwell would say these struggling, unsuccessful ones didn't have the bare minimum of ability, or failed to catch the right lucky break. It is better to summarize his thinking by saying that giftedness equals large success (and therefore is perceived as giftedness) 1) if it meets a certain minimum; and 2) it is potentiated by hard work (possibly stemming from intense interest) and happy accidents of timing and opportunity. An outlier is an outlier based on the convergence of necessary factors, and not due to ability alone.
Slashdot Mirror
Did you see the part where he's teaming up with Charles Nesson to file his case? I don't think we have to worry about rookie mistakes.
Because they were on manual backup control they could not exert enough force on the controls to recover before Vne or the flutter speed of something was attained.
I don't think you'd hit Vne that fast after an updraft-induced stall. And rather than struggle with control pressure, the flight director could have been re-engaged (though this is probably what killed Jos. Kennedy off Nantucket). I'm thinking explosive decompression from a large meteor puncture. But I don't have any special information and your hypothesis is probably as likely as mine. (I'm a commercial instrument pilot but small planes only.)
I know Apple hardware is supposed to be of high quality, and it is often argued that buying a similar-quality PC would cost as much as a Mac. But I still believe there is enough excess profit to Apple for a clone maker to offer the same quality for less money. This is probably the reason Apple will not see Quo just as a manufacturer who will help popularize their OS.
Interesting. Cheap knockoffs sully the brand, but excellent ones cannibalize sales. There may be no hope for a would-be Mac clone maker without enough capital allocated to legal defense.
I have a 10 amp power wang designed to drive any woman wild.
Be careful you don't get a socket error.
And, for the expert users out there, it's just more fun to buy a computer with Linux already on it and not have to pay the Microsoft tax.
I thought we paid that tax EVEN IF we bought a Linux laptop.
Both methods have pros and cons. Which appeals to you and your budget more? Choose that one. Any clean, dry, vibration-free storage is good for removed internal drives.
people would continue to use it indefinitely, and then would expect support as well
Since when, in real terms, has MS ever provided free support of any kind in any form? Bugfixes, maybe; patches sometimes; but who in his right mind thinks he can call Microsoft for nonpaid support when there's an OS problem?
What's wrong with the National Weather Service? Part of NOAA.
"We are very disappointed with the USTR's decision to continue to withhold these documents The president promised an open and transparent administration," said EFF Senior Counsel David Sobel.
So it looks like, if the government, even a new presidential administration in which some have hope, wants to keep the pesty people from derailing a law the administration likes, what it does is HIDE IT until it's too late for the people to be heard? Honest to God, is this America?
Bloody hell. I wonder why they would ever want to ship a software product that did that.
You must be new here. (grin)
I mean, really?
I suggest keep a real (and conservative, no betas, hacks) XP on D: , sparing 15 GB partition to it and use Windows 7 as main partition.
Why don't we have hypervisors of some kind or a BIOS that would let both OS's run simultaneously, essentially on the bare metal, and allow switching back and forth? (I'm sure there are technical problems I'm unaware of that make this impracticable; but given a machine with enough memory, why couldn't someone do it?)
My solution is a KVM switch and two boxes with different OSs.
You must be new here.
"The internet interprets censorship as damage, and routes around it". People can do so too.
What makes you think ISPs would lower the fee on the lowest-bandwidth tier?
Streaming video will tend to be self-limiting. When the slowing produces a maddening result, folks will go back to watching cable.
As much as I'd like to believe your scenario, I think the truth is more likely the Defedants' whining that the same unproven, conclusory allegations they've seen 100 times before are about to be republished, to their harm, all over the internet. Don't get me wrong, I think those allegations are AS GOOD AS proven and must be resolved conclusively AGAINST the record companies, but they seem to make a big point in their brief supporting their motion for dismissal, or judgment on the pleadings, that no court has found as a matter of fact, after trial, that *all* of these oft-repeated allegations of misconduct are true (amounting at this stage merely to a theory of recovery). Of course, personally I believe all of the allegations of misconduct ARE true... but it's my take on what's going on.
If PC-BSD has Sun XFS, I can't see a reason for it to tank. I know FreeBSD 7.1 has at least a beta implementation.
There are already laws (in the form of mandatory tariff inclusions) that require phone companies to provide "emergency access" (a virtually no-cost line) for persons who otherwise could not summon help.
It's not a court of law and most (if not all) ISPs have the right to discountinue service to you at their whim.
This is probably not true since internet access has become akin to a public utility on which people's livelihoods depend. Is it OK to put Ted Telecommuter out of work because Ted Jr. can't be disciplined out of unauthorized downloading?
Is there anyway to defend yourself from these claims? Is there no burden of proof on the RIAA's side? Will AT&T simply punish those accused?
All of your questions have answers, which respectively, are: Yes, but it will involve an expensive lawsuit; No, not at first until enough people complain or someone sues; Yes, until enough outcry forces something like a due process standard. See the insightful post by bug (#27328451) above.
It may be noncriminal but whether it is legally remediable is another issue. The Constitution guarantees us certain rights against being deprived of any "property interest". Lawyers, lick your chops. Whether cutting off someone's internet (akin to cutting off his electricity) based on mere allegations by (or questionable Media Sentry evidence from) RIAA is deprivation of a "property interest" without compensation, due process or equal protection, or will give rise to damages will be a ripe, litigable issue.
At base and in the simplest terms, you just can't screw people without legally sufficient justification. This will include elements of equal protection and due process every time, whether state action is involved or not. In a case of sufficient gravity (internet loss more widespread than the lawsuits ever were), Charlie Nesson is going to have another great project for his Harvard law students.
If they show up, tell reception not to let them past the waiting room. Call the cops IMMEDIATELY if they won't follow your instructions or requests (your business is private property.) Fetch the highest person in the company, preferably an officer, and tell them the BSA has no legal ability to search without a warrant or court order (which requires a lawsuit) and they need to shoo them away. The BSA should get nothing but the phone number of your lawyer.
VERY bad advice. Take it from this lawyer. First, if you are a company of any size your volume licensing agreement allows them to do these audits, and you can be liable in damages for breach of contract for turning them away. But second, and MUCH more to the point, if you shoo them away THEY CAN AND WILL come back with United States Marshalls and confiscate every computer in the place. You won't even hear of their suit before this happens.
You may turn them away if they appear first without any reasonable notice, but the first order of business is to CALL YOUR LAWYER. Then make damned sure your software audit is DONE BY A LAWYER WITH SYSTEMS EXPERTISE (they exist) so the results are protected as Attorney Work Product and not DISCOVERABLE BY THE BSA. Remember, *anyone* in the company can be deposed, whether he / she worked under the direction of an attorney or not.
Step carefully. The BSA has fangs and loves to bite hard and drink LOTS of cash.
I suppose it is possible the Obama administration is paying off a promise to go after file sharers by filing a less-than-effective brief, which when it is unsuccessful will not piss off the millions and millions of file sharers.
Millions and millions. No politician can ignore millions and millions, be they voters or dollars.
Why is it that some musicians, after 10,000 hours of practice, are struggling with their day jobs, and others are mega-stars?
Gladwell would say these struggling, unsuccessful ones didn't have the bare minimum of ability, or failed to catch the right lucky break. It is better to summarize his thinking by saying that giftedness equals large success (and therefore is perceived as giftedness) 1) if it meets a certain minimum; and 2) it is potentiated by hard work (possibly stemming from intense interest) and happy accidents of timing and opportunity. An outlier is an outlier based on the convergence of necessary factors, and not due to ability alone.