You appear to be confusing the cooling system for the engine with aircon/climate control.
No, I know what I'm on about, it appears you are confusing the cooling system for the aircon?
I'm mentioned the radiator (if your cooling system fails, 9 times out of 10 its the radiator thats the problem), you know the one attached to the engine by 2 hoses. Those hoses contain a coolant fluid that is not in motion whilst the engine is switched off, it's this coolant fluid that allows the engine to bleed heat via a radiator.
So not only is it obnoxiously clear you don't know anything about cars, it's painfully obvious you don't even read posts because I have no idea how you got "aircon" from "radiator".
Yep, Corona is the #1 selling beer in Mexico, the top-selling imported beer in the US and in the top 5 best-selling beers worldwide. It's quite a mystery why it's so popular.
Because everyone shoves a slice of lemon in the top to disguise the fact it tastes like horse piss and damn few people have figured that out.
Adding lemon or lime to beer is a crime, if the beer is so crap that you need to disguise the flavour it's not worth drinking.
Damn, I wish I had about 10 grand to cover startup costs as it sounds like a great business opportunity, I could sell at cost plus 20% and the Aussies would be getting a great deal and I'd be making a nice profit for myself. I'm right next to two of the major distribution hubs so I get nearly anything in 2-3 days max, usually next day.
A pretty bad business plan as you'll be competing with companies that already ship to Australia like Play-Asia (HK), Zavvi (UK) or DVD.co.uk (erm, UK) also with existing drop shippers like Oz Game Shop and the fact that retailers like JB HiFi are finally realising that the prices they pay for games are bullshit and have started direct import, bypassing the local distributor.
Parallel importing has been legal for some time. The last game I bought locally was Starcraft 2 and I only did that because I wanted it on release day, even then SC2 was cheaper them most games (A$70 compared to A$90).
So in a loser pays system, what happens if you're on the wrong end of a lawsuit from one of those $500/hr lawyer teams and you can only pony up for a $150/hour lawyer and you lose?
Here is where lawyers do something called "no-win, no-fee". If you've got a semi-decent defence (remember that the plaintiff has the burden of proof, they must prove what they say you did, you need only provide enough evidence to cast that into doubt) a high priced lawyer may choose to take on your case on a no-win, no-fee basis as he's got a good chance of winning his high price off the plaintiff. A lot of firms do no-win no fee in Australia.
No-win, no-fee can be used in the reverse (by a plaintiff of "claimant") but 1. they need rock solid evidence and 2. I'm assuming in your example that the lawsuit is a sham and the defender is innocent.
Loser pays is not perfect and by far not impossible to game but it's a hell of a lot better then the alternatives. It's been working in Australia and other nations for over 20 years now, if it were that easy to game someone would have done it by now. Instead people who launch frivolous suits like the MPIAA/RIAA are afraid to do so in Australia as they would be responsible for the costs, they tried suing one ISP and are currently trying to get the amount they have to pay for the defendants lawyers reduced.
Lets try this scenario again except changing the "loser pays" system to the "American rule" where each side is responsible for their own fees.
what happens if you're on the wrong end of a lawsuit from one of those $500/hr lawyer teams and you can only pony up for a $150/hour lawyer and you lose?
So what happens here, you can only afford a cheap lawyer regardless of your chances of winning?
Not only have your chances not decreased because they can afford better lawyers and are at no risk from losing, your chances of being sued frivolously have increased because they will never be punished for it.
Sounds to me like you need to upgrade your cooling system, perhaps with a bigger radiator and more fan capacity
I understand what you mean but I think you've misunderstood me, my radiator performs well when the engine is running but when the engine isn't running (the car is parked in the sun whilst I'm at work) there's no cooling. Where I live it gets above 40 degrees C in the summer, leave your car in the sun for 8 hours and the insides get the same.
In that kind of heat you learn to use things like steering wheel covers and put a sock over the gear-stick. I learned that one the hard way early on as I had a chrome plated gear-stick. I'm sure people who live in places that freeze for a few months have their own tricks.
Yeah, at this point it's just a publicity stunt. The cynic in me doesn't believe Carreon is dumb; look at all the extra attention and internet traffic this little affair has started.
Which is why you need a loser pays system. Right now he can hire 1 shmuck lawyer for $100 and tie up (potentially) good companies in the defence of a frivolous suit who have to pay $500 p/h lawyers to debunk the 1 shmuck. Under a loser pays system, FunnyJunk would be liable for the court costs of the people he sues if he didn't have a water tight case (Read: Just doing this for publicity).
Personally I've never heard of FunnyJunk before a few days ago, but I've just added it to the blacklist of my routers DNS relay, just in case I accidentally visit it.
Well i have proof that the general population is far stupider now than 500 years ago. But the rate of stupid started growing exponentially in 1992.
Today we have masses of drooling morons that cant even figure out how to add water to a radiator if their car was overheating, cant understand that it's bad to not look out the window of the car while driving, and has elected or supports a band of utterly evil people that want to roll back civil rights to the early 1950's.
Well you're meant to add coolant to radiators as they easily get to above 100 degrees C. In summer in Oz, the coolant in my radiator can start cold at 40+ Degrees C after being left in the sun. If you put water in a radiator you'll find the water boiling out after 5-10 mins of driving.
Which leads people to install all kinds of dodgy bits of software to compensate. I had a dev of Korean origin, when I got his laptop back he had 7 different programs (not extensions, programs) for spell checking in Korean in IE because a lot of sites he used were designed for IE only.
Also, it was managements decision that staff had no restrictions on what they could install on their laptops, but that's an argument I see both sides of.
IT professionals by and large recognize in function that the cloud is just today's shiny version of a main frame and dumb terminals.
I have been shouting this from the rooftops for the past two years. People still just don't get it.
On/. you're preaching to the choir.
I've pointed this out to every manager who's looked all starry eyed when mentioning the cloud.
1. Management thinks we can save money by moving to a mainframe.
2. IT deploys thin clients.
3. Thin clients and mainframes cause a bottleneck.
4. Management thinks we can fix the bottleneck by deploying thick clients.
5. IT deploys thick clients.
6. Go to step 1.
Funny how these markets and lawyers and politicians always leave-out relevant facts. "Alan Archibald, QC, acting for Apple, told the court it was irrelevant how many iPads had been sold or returned because Apple had offered to provide full refunds, so there was no loss to customers.
This doesn't matter under Australian law. They aren't being sued by customers, they are being fined by the authorities for breaking the law.
Apple knew it's "4G" would not work on Australian LTE networks (the frequencies used by Telstra and planning to be used by other telcos are not secret by a long shot) but advertised it anyway, misleading advertising is the law they were charged with breaking.
They sort of buried the lead a bit phrasing it that way. The last I heard, there are zero 4G towers in the entirety of Australia. Yeah, none.
You're woefully misinformed.
The US describes HSPA+ as 4G (in reality it's a 3.5 G technology) we've had that since 2008, in fact we were the first country to have a commercial HSPA+ service.
We've had commercial WIMAX networks since 2009.
All three network operators are deploying LTE as we speak. One telco, Telstra has an active commercial LTE network. In fact this is where the law suit makes a lot of sense, the Ipad does not operate on the same frequency as the LTE networks in Australia so it's limited to 3G technologies (no, Australia does not consider HSPA+ to be "4G"), Apple knew this and falsely advertised the feature deliberately.
you probably won't see someone rendering 3D models on a tablet
What do you think happens 20 to 60 times a second in any tablet game? Tablet graphics aren't in the N64/DS days with a limit of 2000 triangles per scene anymore.
He means rendering something like in Blender or Maya.
What you're talking about is displaying images that have already been made. It's the difference between drawing a picture and holding up a picture.
Besides that, as a PC gamer I say tablet graphics are waaaaaay back in the N64/PS1 days. I had better anti-aliasing on a Voodoo card. They've got a very long way to go before getting to the extremely low standards of today's consoles, let alone the standards of PC's of 5 years ago.
I've worked in GIS, tablets haven't got nearly enough power to do any serious map rendering. They can display maps just fine, like any other web browser but making those maps is still done using server based WMS or IMS application, they simply lack the power to simply cut up map images on demand let alone combine this with spatial data. Tablets like the Galaxy Tab or Ipad haven't managed to find an application in GIS, when someone enters in results from a drill hole assay, the still use a laptop or desktop, despite the low power requirements of data entry on this level its just a metric shitload easier with a proper KB and mouse. I wouldn't use tablets for anything other then presentation, even then if it hasn't got a rotation lock it's still as useful as an ashtray on a motorbike.
My cousin has had an HP that did this before the iPad was a thing. It runs WinXP for Tablets.
Not just HP but Toshiba, Panasonic, Fujitsu, IBM (before they sold the brand to Lenovo) all sold tablets. Even a few models with GPS modules designed expressly to be put in vehicles except that the GPS units were proper GPS, not aGPS so they had real accuracy and were hideously expensive (well they still are, the Ipad hasn't done anything to this market).
But this is ignored by the brainwashed idiots that write tripe like the article, the Ipad is just a Fujitsu tablet minus the keyboard (and dont Apple sell keyboards for the Ipad, what a strange coincidence). It seems you cant win with these idiots, if manufacturers keep existing designs, they "are outdated relics unable to innovate". If manufacturers try something new they "are scared and being left behind" by some imaginary revolution. It's all bollocks as these manufacturers have been making tablets for years and despite the Ipad, Galaxy Tab and multitude of sub $200 tablets have not been supplanted in their niche applications (GIS, Vehicles, ETC...).
Realistically, the most innovative screen out there in the consumer world is on the Galaxy Note and even that's only a natural progression, high end touchscreens have taken pen and touch input for years, I worked with a 15" 3M model from 2003 back in 05 that did this, $3000 worth of screen. So it's natural that the same thing appears on consumer gear once it gets cheaper.
The looser is required to pay the winner the same amount as that which they paid their own lawyers. But there is nothing preventing the winner from paying his own lawyer more (or less) then the amount awarded.
Not necessarily in Oz, legal bills can be fought over as the loser attempts to lessen the punishment (the winning side may be asked by a judge to justify the amount they have asked for if the judge thinks its unreasonable).
But if you have a good case, you may get a lawyer well above your pay grade who will fight to get the loser (who can pay them) to pay their high price. A high priced lawyer taking on cases on "no win, no fee" basis is not unusual.
Loser pays let's rich people run a steam roller over poor people.
If I have a $20,000,000 legal fund and I sue you, Me paying your bottom feeder $150 an hour lawyer is not a big deal, and the possibility of me winning is huge as I can fabricate all kinds of credible evidence... Look at the RIAA and how they fabricate all kinds of stuff.
But Dr Evil,
This is the exact opposite of what has happened in Australia.
Rich people are afraid to sue poor people because that 150 an hour shmuck lawyer needs only to find enough evidence or fabrications to exonerate his client, then the counter-suit for deformation can cost them a sizable percent of their fortunes. Not to mention the possible jail time for attempting to defraud the court. Fabrications are hard to do right and you cant un-create evidence that the opposing side has, the court in Australia really frowns upon fabricated evidence.
Look at the RIAA and how they fabricate all kinds of stuff.
Once again, why hasn't this happened in Australia.
Because the RIAA members (the actual studios, Aussie judges will see right through the RIAA charade) will have their arse counter-sued off for every single lawsuit. Plus Aussie judges wont entertain "john doe" lawsuits and Australian ISP's are not obliged to do anything for the RIAA (as proven in AFACT vs iinet). The burden of proof is stacked high on the side of the plantif and as you pointed out, the RIAA don't have a high standard of proof.
Loser pays stops rich people/corporations from using the courts as a cudgel against average people. Not only that, high priced lawyers will take your case on a "no win, no fee" basis if they think you've got a good case as if they can win, the rich loser pays their $2000 an hour rates. It works quite well.
While DirecTV's Chairman is crowing about his viewers lacking an interest in paying for an "extra box" on top of what he provides? Viewers will continue to drop DirecTV service completely,
This is inevitable, broadcast services are dying a slow death as multi-cast and on-demand services become more prevalent.
once they use boxes like AppleTV.
This made me laugh.
Apple has had no success with AppleTV and for good reason, they are trying to follow the same "micropayment" model that is killing the other companies, when you look at it, paying $2 per episode is no different then pay-per-view. AppleTV has completely failed to take off and unlike Microsoft they are unable to bundle it with their other offering due to the fact it's a bit of hardware.
This "Direct TV" guy (they don't exist in Oz) is right about that, people don't want another box, his or Apple's. They want this shit built into their TV sets and not have it controlled by someone else. This is why Napster and Bit Torrent is such a huge success, not because it's free but because it provides people with what they want.
Apple TV is a failure. A successful on demand service will integrate with what people already have and provide access to what they want without asking for payment every single time.
Sure they do. How else do you think they make money? Even when they sue, the purpose of the suit is to force the defendant to take a license, either court-imposed or in settlement negotiations. In the case of a non-practicing entity, the purpose of an injunction is just to give the patentee leverage in the license negotiations. There are exceptions, such as a patentee that has an exclusive licensee and is suing to prevent others from using the technology, but ultimately that's about protecting the value of the original license.
You seem very confused on what a patent troll is.
You've described an ordinary patent holder, not a patent troll. Patent holders license out their patents, patent trolls hide their patents and sue for an exorbitant amount of money when a patent they've secreted away is violated. This avoids all the tedious negotiation that come with licensing patents from the outset and denying the defendant a chance to work around the patent.
Patent trolls do not look for reasonable fees, they look for people to sue for more then a license is worth.
CSIRO is not a patent troll because they freely license their patents to almost anyone who wants to use them. They don't lock their patents up and wait for someone to accidentally infringe them, if you want to license a CSIRO patent you just contact them. Patent trolls do not license their patents. CSIRO developed the technologies they license, the money gained from the patents goes into more research, so they aren't trolling to get money for shareholders because they haven't got any.
So the article doesn't know its arse from its elbow.
Yeah every now and then Slashdot has these silly articles about PC power consumption, "kill a watt" etc.
Still, a lot of people still haven't got the message "If you turn shit off when you're not using it, your power bills go down". That seemed to be the overriding message behind the summary. This goes for a lot of things, TV, aircon/heater, lights and what not. The only device I have on 24/7 in my house is the fridge. Some people are actually surprised I don't have a A$1000 per quarter power bill (I pay about A$80-120 per quarter at A$0.22 ish per KW).
If I do have a PC on for a download or something, I use a low power PC like my old laptop.
"Retina Display" is not a type of display, it is a marketing term for a dense pixel display. While LG has made dense pixel display's for the iPhone, they do not appear on the iPad3, marketed under the name "Retina Display." I responded to a claim that Apple had somehow locked up the supply of "Retina Displays," which seems to me to be demonstrably false.
I agree with that point, I'm just pointing out that it was LG and not Apple who made the display and they haven't restricted its use by other manufacturers. I think Sony made a high resolution Android phone but it didn't sell.
Nearly all the current retina displays are made by Samsung (with a small percentage made by Sharp). Do you really believe that Samsung (which shipped nearly 25% more smartphones than Apple last quarter) could not simply switch to the display they sell to Apple if they so chose?
The original Retina display was developed and made by LG . It should come as no surprise that LG make another display that is superior to it.
Also, there have been Android phones with Retina displays, there just isn't demand for them. Firstly because Retina is the wrong aspect ratio, secondly because people cant tell the difference.
I don't get why people think barter is more moral than money. I can see being against government endorsed fiat currency. But money allows complicated development to occur. You can use barter to build anything of substance. Money allows for figuring out the most efficient way to accomplish your goals.
They think it's a good way to avoid tax. It isn't.
They also don't realise how impractical it is. 1/3 of a banana for that box of nails... what are you going to do with the other 2/3 of the banana?
Allow free importation of goods from the US and other markets and watch the vendor premiums for your mysterious island continent collapse. If Australians could simply buy from Adobe US, It'd be pretty difficult for Adobe to maintain a price premium...
Ummm...
Parallel importation of software is perfectly legal. I buy all my games from Hong Kong or the UK. I can order Photoshop from B&H PhotoVideo in New York and they'll deliver it to me in BumFuck, Western Australia. Ooops, sorry, that's Perth, Western Australia.
What I have a small problem with is the fact that I cant buy from Australian stores, who pay Australian taxes and support the Australian economy. The government has a very big problem with this.
But my prediction is that the report will tell us what we already know, Aussies are getting ripped off, the distributors are gouging prices and they'll have a nice list of recommendations that'll never happen because if for no other reason, the opposition will stop it because it wasn't their idea.
BTW, Kangaroo's aren't like Velociraptor Sheep, first they are bigger then a Velociraptor or a sheep. They are more like 6 ft tall bounding rocks because it looks like your car has hit a rock after running into one.
... but I get busy doing something most Sunday nights or forget to watch it, so I usually start the download Monday morning and watch it after work.
It's not pirating if you're time shifting.
Once again the entertainment industry is failing to provide people what they want and so people are taking matters into their own hands.
I'm one of the millions of people pirating Game of Thrones...
It's not even on TV here in Australia. It wont be for six months at the very least. As the GP post said, the entertainment industry is failing to provide.
Slashdot Mirror
No, I know what I'm on about, it appears you are confusing the cooling system for the aircon?
I'm mentioned the radiator (if your cooling system fails, 9 times out of 10 its the radiator thats the problem), you know the one attached to the engine by 2 hoses. Those hoses contain a coolant fluid that is not in motion whilst the engine is switched off, it's this coolant fluid that allows the engine to bleed heat via a radiator.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiator
So not only is it obnoxiously clear you don't know anything about cars, it's painfully obvious you don't even read posts because I have no idea how you got "aircon" from "radiator".
Yep, Corona is the #1 selling beer in Mexico, the top-selling imported beer in the US and in the top 5 best-selling beers worldwide. It's quite a mystery why it's so popular.
Because everyone shoves a slice of lemon in the top to disguise the fact it tastes like horse piss and damn few people have figured that out.
Adding lemon or lime to beer is a crime, if the beer is so crap that you need to disguise the flavour it's not worth drinking.
Damn, I wish I had about 10 grand to cover startup costs as it sounds like a great business opportunity, I could sell at cost plus 20% and the Aussies would be getting a great deal and I'd be making a nice profit for myself. I'm right next to two of the major distribution hubs so I get nearly anything in 2-3 days max, usually next day.
A pretty bad business plan as you'll be competing with companies that already ship to Australia like Play-Asia (HK), Zavvi (UK) or DVD.co.uk (erm, UK) also with existing drop shippers like Oz Game Shop and the fact that retailers like JB HiFi are finally realising that the prices they pay for games are bullshit and have started direct import, bypassing the local distributor.
Parallel importing has been legal for some time. The last game I bought locally was Starcraft 2 and I only did that because I wanted it on release day, even then SC2 was cheaper them most games (A$70 compared to A$90).
So in a loser pays system, what happens if you're on the wrong end of a lawsuit from one of those $500/hr lawyer teams and you can only pony up for a $150/hour lawyer and you lose?
Here is where lawyers do something called "no-win, no-fee". If you've got a semi-decent defence (remember that the plaintiff has the burden of proof, they must prove what they say you did, you need only provide enough evidence to cast that into doubt) a high priced lawyer may choose to take on your case on a no-win, no-fee basis as he's got a good chance of winning his high price off the plaintiff. A lot of firms do no-win no fee in Australia.
No-win, no-fee can be used in the reverse (by a plaintiff of "claimant") but 1. they need rock solid evidence and 2. I'm assuming in your example that the lawsuit is a sham and the defender is innocent.
Loser pays is not perfect and by far not impossible to game but it's a hell of a lot better then the alternatives. It's been working in Australia and other nations for over 20 years now, if it were that easy to game someone would have done it by now. Instead people who launch frivolous suits like the MPIAA/RIAA are afraid to do so in Australia as they would be responsible for the costs, they tried suing one ISP and are currently trying to get the amount they have to pay for the defendants lawyers reduced.
Lets try this scenario again except changing the "loser pays" system to the "American rule" where each side is responsible for their own fees.
what happens if you're on the wrong end of a lawsuit from one of those $500/hr lawyer teams and you can only pony up for a $150/hour lawyer and you lose?
So what happens here, you can only afford a cheap lawyer regardless of your chances of winning?
Not only have your chances not decreased because they can afford better lawyers and are at no risk from losing, your chances of being sued frivolously have increased because they will never be punished for it.
I understand what you mean but I think you've misunderstood me, my radiator performs well when the engine is running but when the engine isn't running (the car is parked in the sun whilst I'm at work) there's no cooling. Where I live it gets above 40 degrees C in the summer, leave your car in the sun for 8 hours and the insides get the same.
In that kind of heat you learn to use things like steering wheel covers and put a sock over the gear-stick. I learned that one the hard way early on as I had a chrome plated gear-stick. I'm sure people who live in places that freeze for a few months have their own tricks.
Yeah, at this point it's just a publicity stunt. The cynic in me doesn't believe Carreon is dumb; look at all the extra attention and internet traffic this little affair has started.
Which is why you need a loser pays system. Right now he can hire 1 shmuck lawyer for $100 and tie up (potentially) good companies in the defence of a frivolous suit who have to pay $500 p/h lawyers to debunk the 1 shmuck. Under a loser pays system, FunnyJunk would be liable for the court costs of the people he sues if he didn't have a water tight case (Read: Just doing this for publicity).
Personally I've never heard of FunnyJunk before a few days ago, but I've just added it to the blacklist of my routers DNS relay, just in case I accidentally visit it.
Well i have proof that the general population is far stupider now than 500 years ago. But the rate of stupid started growing exponentially in 1992.
Today we have masses of drooling morons that cant even figure out how to add water to a radiator if their car was overheating, cant understand that it's bad to not look out the window of the car while driving, and has elected or supports a band of utterly evil people that want to roll back civil rights to the early 1950's.
Well you're meant to add coolant to radiators as they easily get to above 100 degrees C. In summer in Oz, the coolant in my radiator can start cold at 40+ Degrees C after being left in the sun. If you put water in a radiator you'll find the water boiling out after 5-10 mins of driving.
IE does not have addons you mention.
Which leads people to install all kinds of dodgy bits of software to compensate. I had a dev of Korean origin, when I got his laptop back he had 7 different programs (not extensions, programs) for spell checking in Korean in IE because a lot of sites he used were designed for IE only.
Also, it was managements decision that staff had no restrictions on what they could install on their laptops, but that's an argument I see both sides of.
Global warming, ice caps melting, nuclear war, in the end his civ was destroyed by a single spearman.
I have been shouting this from the rooftops for the past two years. People still just don't get it.
On /. you're preaching to the choir.
I've pointed this out to every manager who's looked all starry eyed when mentioning the cloud.
1. Management thinks we can save money by moving to a mainframe.
2. IT deploys thin clients.
3. Thin clients and mainframes cause a bottleneck.
4. Management thinks we can fix the bottleneck by deploying thick clients.
5. IT deploys thick clients.
6. Go to step 1.
This doesn't matter under Australian law. They aren't being sued by customers, they are being fined by the authorities for breaking the law.
Apple knew it's "4G" would not work on Australian LTE networks (the frequencies used by Telstra and planning to be used by other telcos are not secret by a long shot) but advertised it anyway, misleading advertising is the law they were charged with breaking.
They sort of buried the lead a bit phrasing it that way. The last I heard, there are zero 4G towers in the entirety of Australia. Yeah, none.
You're woefully misinformed.
The US describes HSPA+ as 4G (in reality it's a 3.5 G technology) we've had that since 2008, in fact we were the first country to have a commercial HSPA+ service.
We've had commercial WIMAX networks since 2009.
All three network operators are deploying LTE as we speak. One telco, Telstra has an active commercial LTE network. In fact this is where the law suit makes a lot of sense, the Ipad does not operate on the same frequency as the LTE networks in Australia so it's limited to 3G technologies (no, Australia does not consider HSPA+ to be "4G"), Apple knew this and falsely advertised the feature deliberately.
you probably won't see someone rendering 3D models on a tablet
What do you think happens 20 to 60 times a second in any tablet game? Tablet graphics aren't in the N64/DS days with a limit of 2000 triangles per scene anymore.
He means rendering something like in Blender or Maya.
What you're talking about is displaying images that have already been made. It's the difference between drawing a picture and holding up a picture.
Besides that, as a PC gamer I say tablet graphics are waaaaaay back in the N64/PS1 days. I had better anti-aliasing on a Voodoo card. They've got a very long way to go before getting to the extremely low standards of today's consoles, let alone the standards of PC's of 5 years ago.
I've worked in GIS, tablets haven't got nearly enough power to do any serious map rendering. They can display maps just fine, like any other web browser but making those maps is still done using server based WMS or IMS application, they simply lack the power to simply cut up map images on demand let alone combine this with spatial data. Tablets like the Galaxy Tab or Ipad haven't managed to find an application in GIS, when someone enters in results from a drill hole assay, the still use a laptop or desktop, despite the low power requirements of data entry on this level its just a metric shitload easier with a proper KB and mouse. I wouldn't use tablets for anything other then presentation, even then if it hasn't got a rotation lock it's still as useful as an ashtray on a motorbike.
My cousin has had an HP that did this before the iPad was a thing. It runs WinXP for Tablets.
Not just HP but Toshiba, Panasonic, Fujitsu, IBM (before they sold the brand to Lenovo) all sold tablets. Even a few models with GPS modules designed expressly to be put in vehicles except that the GPS units were proper GPS, not aGPS so they had real accuracy and were hideously expensive (well they still are, the Ipad hasn't done anything to this market).
But this is ignored by the brainwashed idiots that write tripe like the article, the Ipad is just a Fujitsu tablet minus the keyboard (and dont Apple sell keyboards for the Ipad, what a strange coincidence). It seems you cant win with these idiots, if manufacturers keep existing designs, they "are outdated relics unable to innovate". If manufacturers try something new they "are scared and being left behind" by some imaginary revolution. It's all bollocks as these manufacturers have been making tablets for years and despite the Ipad, Galaxy Tab and multitude of sub $200 tablets have not been supplanted in their niche applications (GIS, Vehicles, ETC...).
Realistically, the most innovative screen out there in the consumer world is on the Galaxy Note and even that's only a natural progression, high end touchscreens have taken pen and touch input for years, I worked with a 15" 3M model from 2003 back in 05 that did this, $3000 worth of screen. So it's natural that the same thing appears on consumer gear once it gets cheaper.
The looser is required to pay the winner the same amount as that which they paid their own lawyers. But there is nothing preventing the winner from paying his own lawyer more (or less) then the amount awarded.
Not necessarily in Oz, legal bills can be fought over as the loser attempts to lessen the punishment (the winning side may be asked by a judge to justify the amount they have asked for if the judge thinks its unreasonable).
But if you have a good case, you may get a lawyer well above your pay grade who will fight to get the loser (who can pay them) to pay their high price. A high priced lawyer taking on cases on "no win, no fee" basis is not unusual.
Loser pays let's rich people run a steam roller over poor people.
If I have a $20,000,000 legal fund and I sue you, Me paying your bottom feeder $150 an hour lawyer is not a big deal, and the possibility of me winning is huge as I can fabricate all kinds of credible evidence... Look at the RIAA and how they fabricate all kinds of stuff.
But Dr Evil,
This is the exact opposite of what has happened in Australia.
Rich people are afraid to sue poor people because that 150 an hour shmuck lawyer needs only to find enough evidence or fabrications to exonerate his client, then the counter-suit for deformation can cost them a sizable percent of their fortunes. Not to mention the possible jail time for attempting to defraud the court. Fabrications are hard to do right and you cant un-create evidence that the opposing side has, the court in Australia really frowns upon fabricated evidence.
Look at the RIAA and how they fabricate all kinds of stuff.
Once again, why hasn't this happened in Australia.
Because the RIAA members (the actual studios, Aussie judges will see right through the RIAA charade) will have their arse counter-sued off for every single lawsuit. Plus Aussie judges wont entertain "john doe" lawsuits and Australian ISP's are not obliged to do anything for the RIAA (as proven in AFACT vs iinet). The burden of proof is stacked high on the side of the plantif and as you pointed out, the RIAA don't have a high standard of proof.
Loser pays stops rich people/corporations from using the courts as a cudgel against average people. Not only that, high priced lawyers will take your case on a "no win, no fee" basis if they think you've got a good case as if they can win, the rich loser pays their $2000 an hour rates. It works quite well.
While DirecTV's Chairman is crowing about his viewers lacking an interest in paying for an "extra box" on top of what he provides? Viewers will continue to drop DirecTV service completely,
This is inevitable, broadcast services are dying a slow death as multi-cast and on-demand services become more prevalent.
once they use boxes like AppleTV .
This made me laugh. Apple has had no success with AppleTV and for good reason, they are trying to follow the same "micropayment" model that is killing the other companies, when you look at it, paying $2 per episode is no different then pay-per-view. AppleTV has completely failed to take off and unlike Microsoft they are unable to bundle it with their other offering due to the fact it's a bit of hardware.
This "Direct TV" guy (they don't exist in Oz) is right about that, people don't want another box, his or Apple's. They want this shit built into their TV sets and not have it controlled by someone else. This is why Napster and Bit Torrent is such a huge success, not because it's free but because it provides people with what they want.
Apple TV is a failure. A successful on demand service will integrate with what people already have and provide access to what they want without asking for payment every single time.
Patent trolls do not license their patents.
Sure they do. How else do you think they make money? Even when they sue, the purpose of the suit is to force the defendant to take a license, either court-imposed or in settlement negotiations. In the case of a non-practicing entity, the purpose of an injunction is just to give the patentee leverage in the license negotiations. There are exceptions, such as a patentee that has an exclusive licensee and is suing to prevent others from using the technology, but ultimately that's about protecting the value of the original license.
You seem very confused on what a patent troll is.
You've described an ordinary patent holder, not a patent troll. Patent holders license out their patents, patent trolls hide their patents and sue for an exorbitant amount of money when a patent they've secreted away is violated. This avoids all the tedious negotiation that come with licensing patents from the outset and denying the defendant a chance to work around the patent.
Patent trolls do not look for reasonable fees, they look for people to sue for more then a license is worth.
Yeah, deffo taking the piss here.
CSIRO is not a patent troll because they freely license their patents to almost anyone who wants to use them. They don't lock their patents up and wait for someone to accidentally infringe them, if you want to license a CSIRO patent you just contact them. Patent trolls do not license their patents. CSIRO developed the technologies they license, the money gained from the patents goes into more research, so they aren't trolling to get money for shareholders because they haven't got any.
So the article doesn't know its arse from its elbow.
Yeah every now and then Slashdot has these silly articles about PC power consumption, "kill a watt" etc.
Still, a lot of people still haven't got the message "If you turn shit off when you're not using it, your power bills go down". That seemed to be the overriding message behind the summary. This goes for a lot of things, TV, aircon/heater, lights and what not. The only device I have on 24/7 in my house is the fridge. Some people are actually surprised I don't have a A$1000 per quarter power bill (I pay about A$80-120 per quarter at A$0.22 ish per KW).
If I do have a PC on for a download or something, I use a low power PC like my old laptop.
"Retina Display" is not a type of display, it is a marketing term for a dense pixel display. While LG has made dense pixel display's for the iPhone, they do not appear on the iPad3, marketed under the name "Retina Display." I responded to a claim that Apple had somehow locked up the supply of "Retina Displays," which seems to me to be demonstrably false.
I agree with that point, I'm just pointing out that it was LG and not Apple who made the display and they haven't restricted its use by other manufacturers. I think Sony made a high resolution Android phone but it didn't sell.
Nearly all the current retina displays are made by Samsung (with a small percentage made by Sharp). Do you really believe that Samsung (which shipped nearly 25% more smartphones than Apple last quarter) could not simply switch to the display they sell to Apple if they so chose?
The original Retina display was developed and made by LG . It should come as no surprise that LG make another display that is superior to it.
Also, there have been Android phones with Retina displays, there just isn't demand for them. Firstly because Retina is the wrong aspect ratio, secondly because people cant tell the difference.
I don't get why people think barter is more moral than money. I can see being against government endorsed fiat currency. But money allows complicated development to occur. You can use barter to build anything of substance. Money allows for figuring out the most efficient way to accomplish your goals.
They think it's a good way to avoid tax. It isn't.
They also don't realise how impractical it is. 1/3 of a banana for that box of nails... what are you going to do with the other 2/3 of the banana?
Allow free importation of goods from the US and other markets and watch the vendor premiums for your mysterious island continent collapse. If Australians could simply buy from Adobe US, It'd be pretty difficult for Adobe to maintain a price premium...
Ummm...
Parallel importation of software is perfectly legal. I buy all my games from Hong Kong or the UK. I can order Photoshop from B&H PhotoVideo in New York and they'll deliver it to me in BumFuck, Western Australia. Ooops, sorry, that's Perth, Western Australia.
What I have a small problem with is the fact that I cant buy from Australian stores, who pay Australian taxes and support the Australian economy. The government has a very big problem with this.
But my prediction is that the report will tell us what we already know, Aussies are getting ripped off, the distributors are gouging prices and they'll have a nice list of recommendations that'll never happen because if for no other reason, the opposition will stop it because it wasn't their idea.
BTW, Kangaroo's aren't like Velociraptor Sheep, first they are bigger then a Velociraptor or a sheep. They are more like 6 ft tall bounding rocks because it looks like your car has hit a rock after running into one.
... but I get busy doing something most Sunday nights or forget to watch it, so I usually start the download Monday morning and watch it after work.
It's not pirating if you're time shifting.
Once again the entertainment industry is failing to provide people what they want and so people are taking matters into their own hands.
I'm one of the millions of people pirating Game of Thrones...
It's not even on TV here in Australia. It wont be for six months at the very least. As the GP post said, the entertainment industry is failing to provide.