100 km is about 60 miles as I recall. I did not realize that wifi could go that far within the specs of the access points being made. I suppose a directional, perhaps a flat plain, antenna and what not assuming power increases are allowed would get this working but I would worry about jitter and lag. Anyhow, I realized that I do not know something (this is not new and I am not at all ashamed to admit it) about Guam...
I have never been to Guam. I searched for FCC and Guam and a few other search terms and clicked about a dozen links. One thing I could not find was if Guam, and other US territories, are actually obligated to FCC regulations. My understanding is that not all regulations are forced on the territories and that territories are able to have some flexibility in some areas. Do FCC regulations apply with radio transmission power in unlicensed spectra in Guam? I was under the impression that a ham license was not needed in the US territories - though I could easily be mistaken. I am not sure where I heard this but I am sure that I never bothered verifying it when someone mentioned it in the past.
Other than expense, with the ubiquity and importance of internet access, I wonder why they do not have a tertiary backup? It seems logical to maintain a semi-hot facility that has a second microwave transmission tower or to even suck up the expense of a new cable or even just a satellite system that can be brought online to maintain a connection.
Unless things have changed this is patently (pun intended) false information. You are able to make use of someone's patent. You can not sell it, you can not profit from it, you can not transfer it - even via gifting (AFAIK). I am not sure what would compel you to say such a thing. Now it is possible, still, to be illegally infringing on a patent even though it is private use but that does not mean that all private use cases are illegal. Consult a lawyer with expertise in the subject if you want more specific information.
My guess is that you are anti-patent and have been listening in an echo chamber. I do not know but that seems most likely. The reality is that, even if there were a chance that you were infringing, there is little chance of repercussion. That, however, does not make it legal, much like you are unlikely to be ticketed for a jaywalking offense. But, more to the point, private use (fully private - you can not even use patented technology on a public facing website that generates any revenue) is potentially infringing but is not infringing by default, it really depend on what you are using it for.
An example might be; If someone invented and patented a fuel injection system that resulted in a 2-fold efficiency increase then you can probably make that device and put it on your own car. You can not use that vehicle to conduct business nor can you transfer ownership of that vehicle with the altered device still attached. You may not even be able to use that vehicle for anything other than recreational activities.
I am not saying that the law is right. I am just showing you where you have been misinformed. It is possible to use patented technology in private but one must be very careful about doing so if they are worried about being sued for the activity. As always, consult a legal expert before taking mine or anyone else's opinion to be a statement of fact and consider that the ultimate decision may lie with a judge and the various procedures within the justice system in your country of residence.
Patent laws in most countries require some sort of commercial exploitation of the patented invention for the exploitation to be patent infringement. So, a private person can infringe if he, for example, makes the invention and sells it to his friends, or puts it on an advertisement-sponsored website. But if he makes it for himself out of curiosity, and only uses it himself, there is no infringement.
In the USA, also non-commercial use of the invention can be patent infringement, although it is rare for a non-commercial use by a private person to result in a lawsuit.
In practice, the chance of getting sued for patent infringement as a private individual is very slim. Patent lawsuits are very expensive, and most private persons will not be able to pay the damages to the patent holder anyway.
Another interesting thing that can be done is a private company can patent a technology and give that patent to a university (with contractual stipulations, of course) which puts the university in a position to further fund themselves while allowing other companies to capitalize on the investments made at the actual point of the universities.
Any single political system will not work in its "pure" form. Not one single one of them. Most people, I thought, understood this. I was wrong. That is not directed at you, obviously. No socialism, communism, capitalism, anarchist, or other type of system will work effectively. Moderation is key and zealots are stupid regardless of their zealotry.
Where is your super computer? You can not have one because you can not afford one. What you do have is a version of what was once a super computer. Today it is obsolete and will not do anything close to the calculations of the new super computers.
Where is your tank? Your F-22? Your aircraft carrier? For a variety of reasons you do not have one. You do not have the capacity to have any of those things. A replicator will be, in my expectations, exactly the same even if it worked at the atomic level and required no resources other than energy. You may get some version that you can "afford" like a computer. You will not have access to a version such as a super computer.
It is not the best analogy but it should be close enough. That is why, or a simplified version, I do not expect this to be a utopia. I expect it to be better but not an equal society based on merit without the class distinctions. I know of no time in history where we have been a classless society.
I am not familiar with filling out employment applications. I owned my own business, I sold and retired, so applications were not really the same as a generic employee would fill out. I have, on the other hand, read hundreds of resumes and applications and am familiar with boiler-plate applications.
They have all, invariably, not asked about arrests. They have asked, specifically, about convictions. They usually (not all) ask specifically about felony convictions and only for a limited duration - typically 7 or 10 years.
One could also argue that he may get in less trouble than he deserves. That is not my opinion but it could be rationally argued. This is what happens when you engage in criminal acts. We can all agree (I hope) that this is trivial and there should be a salvage law for abandoned property but this is not the same as an attempt to change the law. This is not something noble. It is just a kid doing what comes naturally, as I see it, and laws are quite specifically antithetical in these regards. I dare say that that is what laws due, they force us to not do what comes naturally to us in many ways. Human nature really is animal nature and not this ideal of humanistic behaviors - to rape, murder, pillage, and burn is what we are born to do. (Of course, mixing up the order of those four things is simply unacceptable.)
Thank you. I really like the Cinnamon desktop environment as a user. I find it is a bit harder to hack at but, from a usability view, it is pretty decent. There are some rough edges and things I would advocate changing but, all-in-all, it is well polished, intuitive, and responsive.
Which, by way of a circle, brings us back to the start. As near as I can tell, the government should be afraid of the citizens and not the other way around. This is not true and, I think, is the root cause. How we change it is obvious - revolution. How we keep it changed is also obvious - observation. However, I do not see either being effective long-term. I advocate the latter with the former being one's obligation if they continue to engage in bad behavior.
Actually, things of this nature seem to happen at the State level pretty often in Maine. I have been observing it for years and will be running for the Senate because of this. Comparatively speaking, I have a pretty decent shot at winning and it matters not one bit if I lose so I figure it is worth the effort.
Cinnamon and MATE are up. I am not sure what MATE is based on. Cinnamon is based on GNOME. I kind of like Mint, it is my main distro. I call it Linux for Retards. It suits me just perfectly.
They are all pretty much hourly employees that I know, I know one who is salaried and I know none who are contractors. Where do you live? I deal with dealership mechanics all the time as cars are a hobby of mine. I own a fair number of cars and insist that they are in top condition so I even have a number of friends in the industry. I have not discussed the workings of their dealership with all of them but I have discussed the details with a fair number of them.
Do you really think China gives a shit what the UK does? I will be honest and say that I do not know. It just seems unlikely. China already has laws covering anything they want to declare as being illegal. They are, albeit a better one today, a repressive regime. They really do not care much about things like legal procedures and actually needing a law in order to monitor traffic. They already have The Great Firewall of China. I should also add that they have the fastest super computer, that we know about, that has ever been built on this planet. China ain't never scared!
In other words, I really do not think China gives one iota of poop of concern when deciding how to monitor their citizen's internet activities. They care, and I am only suspecting - I do not know, one wit about the UK's silly security policies.
That was a strange claim to make. What makes you think China would give a shit and copy the UK instead of just doing it on their own if they wanted?
My mother is gone but she did not drive - she did not know how a car worked though I suspect she knew the theory. She new how a computer operated and used one. She had me for a son after all.
I do not expect users to be omnipotent. I do not expect them to know the work that goes on beneath their GUI. I do not expect them to know how to code.
I do expect them to read, to learn, and to understand default behaviors. I expect them to double check if they are unsure AND to be honest enough with themselves to determine when they are unsure. I do not expect them to be entirely perfect, I too am a user.
At the same time I do *not* do any user-interface work if I can help it. Why? I am not good at it. I can work within any interface, personally, but am not good at designing one for other people. I do expect settings made to another application to be retained when that application is removed.
If this were my project I would change it so that they could make a selection on removal that alters the backup daemon's settings by removing the folder(s) applicable. I would do so if enough complaints were lodged. My first attempt to resolve the situation would be giving them instructions on why this is the default, what they can do to change it, and helping them learn how they can prevent this from occurring in the future. My first change would not be to change the application though.
I expect you to know how to use the applications that you download, install, and configure. I expect you to read the help files. I expect the end-user to be willing to put out the effort to understand that the changes are being made and where they are being made. Obviously this application could have been more informative but there are space and usability issues. I suspect the user was informed of the changes during the apps first run or installation and failed to pay attention to them but that is not really pertinent. They are still obligated to know what they are doing in regards to making system changes.
The barrier for entry with a telephone was pretty low. They had to learn to pick up the receiver, dial the number(s), and then speak into the microphone when their party answered. Telephone users took the time to know how to do this. I expect the same thing, I dare say it is your duty, with automobiles. If you are going to control a one ton steel cage at high speeds then it behooves you to ensure it is safe to operate. To do so you must have a modicum of knowledge about how it works mechanically. I submit that you are obligated to know so that you can lower your risks to other people using that shared space.
I have a beautiful woodworking shop. It is full of tools. One of which is a computer but that is not important. Would you go into the shop, use a plunge router, get hurt, and then say that the router was to blame because you did not know how to operate one? Of course not... You use the tool after you learn about it.
The worst part is that you likely know this and are just being obtuse because your ego will not let you admit the error of your thinking. Your biases enabled you to jump the gun without looking at it logically. At least that is what I expect... Then again - it could be me. You have given me no compelling reasons to think so. I am quite willing to consider your view, I mentioned my inability to make a decent user experience, and would defer to you if you gave me compelling information. It is not like I am unknown around here and I often accept help from other people - I even ask for it.
Anyhow, to make a short story long, this is what I would expect an application to do. Even if the application did something I did not expect the onus would be mine as it is my obligation to know how to use the tools I am using. Failure to uphold my end of the contract, by being ignorant, is my fault and not the fault of the developer. If this were something outlandish, say it changed the settings and you could never change them back no matter what you did, then I would be unhappy. This does not do anything even remotely freaky, strange even, or unexpected.
Slashdot Mirror
Are you confusing Java with JavaScript?
100 km is about 60 miles as I recall. I did not realize that wifi could go that far within the specs of the access points being made. I suppose a directional, perhaps a flat plain, antenna and what not assuming power increases are allowed would get this working but I would worry about jitter and lag. Anyhow, I realized that I do not know something (this is not new and I am not at all ashamed to admit it) about Guam...
I have never been to Guam. I searched for FCC and Guam and a few other search terms and clicked about a dozen links. One thing I could not find was if Guam, and other US territories, are actually obligated to FCC regulations. My understanding is that not all regulations are forced on the territories and that territories are able to have some flexibility in some areas. Do FCC regulations apply with radio transmission power in unlicensed spectra in Guam? I was under the impression that a ham license was not needed in the US territories - though I could easily be mistaken. I am not sure where I heard this but I am sure that I never bothered verifying it when someone mentioned it in the past.
Other than expense, with the ubiquity and importance of internet access, I wonder why they do not have a tertiary backup? It seems logical to maintain a semi-hot facility that has a second microwave transmission tower or to even suck up the expense of a new cable or even just a satellite system that can be brought online to maintain a connection.
Unless things have changed this is patently (pun intended) false information. You are able to make use of someone's patent. You can not sell it, you can not profit from it, you can not transfer it - even via gifting (AFAIK). I am not sure what would compel you to say such a thing. Now it is possible, still, to be illegally infringing on a patent even though it is private use but that does not mean that all private use cases are illegal. Consult a lawyer with expertise in the subject if you want more specific information.
My guess is that you are anti-patent and have been listening in an echo chamber. I do not know but that seems most likely. The reality is that, even if there were a chance that you were infringing, there is little chance of repercussion. That, however, does not make it legal, much like you are unlikely to be ticketed for a jaywalking offense. But, more to the point, private use (fully private - you can not even use patented technology on a public facing website that generates any revenue) is potentially infringing but is not infringing by default, it really depend on what you are using it for.
An example might be; If someone invented and patented a fuel injection system that resulted in a 2-fold efficiency increase then you can probably make that device and put it on your own car. You can not use that vehicle to conduct business nor can you transfer ownership of that vehicle with the altered device still attached. You may not even be able to use that vehicle for anything other than recreational activities.
I am not saying that the law is right. I am just showing you where you have been misinformed. It is possible to use patented technology in private but one must be very careful about doing so if they are worried about being sued for the activity. As always, consult a legal expert before taking mine or anyone else's opinion to be a statement of fact and consider that the ultimate decision may lie with a judge and the various procedures within the justice system in your country of residence.
More information can be had here:
http://www.iusmentis.com/paten...
Patent laws in most countries require some sort of commercial exploitation of the patented invention for the exploitation to be patent infringement. So, a private person can infringe if he, for example, makes the invention and sells it to his friends, or puts it on an advertisement-sponsored website. But if he makes it for himself out of curiosity, and only uses it himself, there is no infringement.
In the USA, also non-commercial use of the invention can be patent infringement, although it is rare for a non-commercial use by a private person to result in a lawsuit.
In practice, the chance of getting sued for patent infringement as a private individual is very slim. Patent lawsuits are very expensive, and most private persons will not be able to pay the damages to the patent holder anyway.
Another interesting thing that can be done is a private company can patent a technology and give that patent to a university (with contractual stipulations, of course) which puts the university in a position to further fund themselves while allowing other companies to capitalize on the investments made at the actual point of the universities.
Any single political system will not work in its "pure" form. Not one single one of them. Most people, I thought, understood this. I was wrong. That is not directed at you, obviously. No socialism, communism, capitalism, anarchist, or other type of system will work effectively. Moderation is key and zealots are stupid regardless of their zealotry.
Where is your super computer? You can not have one because you can not afford one. What you do have is a version of what was once a super computer. Today it is obsolete and will not do anything close to the calculations of the new super computers.
Where is your tank? Your F-22? Your aircraft carrier? For a variety of reasons you do not have one. You do not have the capacity to have any of those things. A replicator will be, in my expectations, exactly the same even if it worked at the atomic level and required no resources other than energy. You may get some version that you can "afford" like a computer. You will not have access to a version such as a super computer.
It is not the best analogy but it should be close enough. That is why, or a simplified version, I do not expect this to be a utopia. I expect it to be better but not an equal society based on merit without the class distinctions. I know of no time in history where we have been a classless society.
I am not familiar with filling out employment applications. I owned my own business, I sold and retired, so applications were not really the same as a generic employee would fill out. I have, on the other hand, read hundreds of resumes and applications and am familiar with boiler-plate applications.
They have all, invariably, not asked about arrests. They have asked, specifically, about convictions. They usually (not all) ask specifically about felony convictions and only for a limited duration - typically 7 or 10 years.
One could also argue that he may get in less trouble than he deserves. That is not my opinion but it could be rationally argued. This is what happens when you engage in criminal acts. We can all agree (I hope) that this is trivial and there should be a salvage law for abandoned property but this is not the same as an attempt to change the law. This is not something noble. It is just a kid doing what comes naturally, as I see it, and laws are quite specifically antithetical in these regards. I dare say that that is what laws due, they force us to not do what comes naturally to us in many ways. Human nature really is animal nature and not this ideal of humanistic behaviors - to rape, murder, pillage, and burn is what we are born to do. (Of course, mixing up the order of those four things is simply unacceptable.)
Thank you. I really like the Cinnamon desktop environment as a user. I find it is a bit harder to hack at but, from a usability view, it is pretty decent. There are some rough edges and things I would advocate changing but, all-in-all, it is well polished, intuitive, and responsive.
Which, by way of a circle, brings us back to the start. As near as I can tell, the government should be afraid of the citizens and not the other way around. This is not true and, I think, is the root cause. How we change it is obvious - revolution. How we keep it changed is also obvious - observation. However, I do not see either being effective long-term. I advocate the latter with the former being one's obligation if they continue to engage in bad behavior.
I feel the most secure in my rights when the congress is unable to "get anything done." YMMV
Actually, things of this nature seem to happen at the State level pretty often in Maine. I have been observing it for years and will be running for the Senate because of this. Comparatively speaking, I have a pretty decent shot at winning and it matters not one bit if I lose so I figure it is worth the effort.
Cinnamon and MATE are up. I am not sure what MATE is based on. Cinnamon is based on GNOME. I kind of like Mint, it is my main distro. I call it Linux for Retards. It suits me just perfectly.
They are all pretty much hourly employees that I know, I know one who is salaried and I know none who are contractors. Where do you live? I deal with dealership mechanics all the time as cars are a hobby of mine. I own a fair number of cars and insist that they are in top condition so I even have a number of friends in the industry. I have not discussed the workings of their dealership with all of them but I have discussed the details with a fair number of them.
It seems to me that, if they were smart, they would be working to sell their company while it still has its high valuation.
Umm... You say all your communications are encrypted. Err... You are aware that what you just posted is not, in fact, encrypted, right?
Do you really think China gives a shit what the UK does? I will be honest and say that I do not know. It just seems unlikely. China already has laws covering anything they want to declare as being illegal. They are, albeit a better one today, a repressive regime. They really do not care much about things like legal procedures and actually needing a law in order to monitor traffic. They already have The Great Firewall of China. I should also add that they have the fastest super computer, that we know about, that has ever been built on this planet. China ain't never scared!
In other words, I really do not think China gives one iota of poop of concern when deciding how to monitor their citizen's internet activities. They care, and I am only suspecting - I do not know, one wit about the UK's silly security policies.
That was a strange claim to make. What makes you think China would give a shit and copy the UK instead of just doing it on their own if they wanted?
No. I have it on good authority that freedom is just another word for nothing left to lose. Ask Bobby...
How, realistically, are we going to stop them from spying? What alternatives do you have?
My mother is gone but she did not drive - she did not know how a car worked though I suspect she knew the theory. She new how a computer operated and used one. She had me for a son after all.
I do not expect users to be omnipotent. I do not expect them to know the work that goes on beneath their GUI. I do not expect them to know how to code.
I do expect them to read, to learn, and to understand default behaviors. I expect them to double check if they are unsure AND to be honest enough with themselves to determine when they are unsure. I do not expect them to be entirely perfect, I too am a user.
At the same time I do *not* do any user-interface work if I can help it. Why? I am not good at it. I can work within any interface, personally, but am not good at designing one for other people. I do expect settings made to another application to be retained when that application is removed.
If this were my project I would change it so that they could make a selection on removal that alters the backup daemon's settings by removing the folder(s) applicable. I would do so if enough complaints were lodged. My first attempt to resolve the situation would be giving them instructions on why this is the default, what they can do to change it, and helping them learn how they can prevent this from occurring in the future. My first change would not be to change the application though.
I expect you to know how to use the applications that you download, install, and configure. I expect you to read the help files. I expect the end-user to be willing to put out the effort to understand that the changes are being made and where they are being made. Obviously this application could have been more informative but there are space and usability issues. I suspect the user was informed of the changes during the apps first run or installation and failed to pay attention to them but that is not really pertinent. They are still obligated to know what they are doing in regards to making system changes.
The barrier for entry with a telephone was pretty low. They had to learn to pick up the receiver, dial the number(s), and then speak into the microphone when their party answered. Telephone users took the time to know how to do this. I expect the same thing, I dare say it is your duty, with automobiles. If you are going to control a one ton steel cage at high speeds then it behooves you to ensure it is safe to operate. To do so you must have a modicum of knowledge about how it works mechanically. I submit that you are obligated to know so that you can lower your risks to other people using that shared space.
I have a beautiful woodworking shop. It is full of tools. One of which is a computer but that is not important. Would you go into the shop, use a plunge router, get hurt, and then say that the router was to blame because you did not know how to operate one? Of course not... You use the tool after you learn about it.
The worst part is that you likely know this and are just being obtuse because your ego will not let you admit the error of your thinking. Your biases enabled you to jump the gun without looking at it logically. At least that is what I expect... Then again - it could be me. You have given me no compelling reasons to think so. I am quite willing to consider your view, I mentioned my inability to make a decent user experience, and would defer to you if you gave me compelling information. It is not like I am unknown around here and I often accept help from other people - I even ask for it.
Anyhow, to make a short story long, this is what I would expect an application to do. Even if the application did something I did not expect the onus would be mine as it is my obligation to know how to use the tools I am using. Failure to uphold my end of the contract, by being ignorant, is my fault and not the fault of the developer. If this were something outlandish, say it changed the settings and you could never change them back no matter what you did, then I would be unhappy. This does not do anything even remotely freaky, strange even, or unexpected.
I do not know this singer or anything about her but, really, what is your point? Why is this important and how does it pertain to the subject at hand?
I believe it is still supported but it is not (and has never been) an actual standard. There is no authoritative specification for the blink element.
Now we know were the wires went when we paid them to roll out connectivity for rural people.
Kind of... Well, they left of their own volition I suppose. Then we really should consider the Spanish...
I think the only relevant question is this...
Are you a lumberjack?
Err... Where do you think those people came from that did all those things?