Sony assigns one person (like an intern) to work on a new game, "George the Hot's Zeppelin Racing", and registers a trademark on the abbreviated form of that name. It then files one of these complaints about the domain. Once it has the domain, it cancels the project and reassigns that intern.
The FTC's main site indicates 1-877-FTC-HELP as the phone number to call to file a complaint. Even if they can block phone calls to that number, the FTC's address is listed as:
Federal Trade Commission
600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20580
and I suspect sending a letter to that address re: complaints department would probably get it to the right person.
And yet all the politicians who think we need to enact all these stricter laws when it comes to video game sales will ignore this and try to claim that any 5 year old can walk into a game store and buy GTA IV on their own.
Which is more expensive: buying a politician to kill the bill before it becomes a law or filing a lawsuit to have the law found unconstitutional after the bill has become a law?
"Compilation" implies to me that multiple files were involved, so it should count as her first and second strikes, and if that compilation involved three or more files her third strike as well.
Perhaps I've played too much Final Fantasy, but when I first read that headline my first thought was of the "minigame" involving infiltrating Don Corneo's villa to rescue Tifa fairly early in the game.
If you don't like it, why? I like my life, where people who commit crimes are actually tracked down by the state and held. You might not believe it, but the police can actually gain access to your house if they can show evidence that you committed a crime.
The latter part of your last sentence is the key. IF they can show evidence that you've done something wrong, then they can ask permission to access information that they otherwise wouldn't be allowed to access.
What type of access restrictions does this license plate image database have? Can any law enforcement officer track any license plate number (like an ex-romantic interest) or does a law enforcement officer need to show a cause to obtain this information? The article wasn't clear on this point.
You know, I think the judge recruitment pool would be rather low if you didn't allow those that have either stood as plaintiffs or defendants as lawyers. Because if they're biased then so is the EFF lawyer too, right? Or is that just the lawyers on the side you don't like.
If a lawyer that worked extensively or exclusively with the EFF became a judge then yes, I would expect them to recuse themselves when a case involving the EFF came before them. Requiring a judge to have no ties to the topic of their case would in some cases be unrealistic (for instance, for a case involving a coffee company you'd have to find a judge that never drank coffee. Probably not going to happen.) Requiring that they were not previously in bed with the topic of their case is not.
I fail to understand the entire roll-up computation field. What's the appeal? Why would I want to carry around a cylinder of material that is easy to crush (and therefore crease, likely destroying in the process) when the same item can be made flat, rigid, and slide easily into my briefcase along with other flat things that I need to carry around? Floppy items are no fun to type on. Curly things are no fun to read.
Can someone explain, please?
You don't carry around the cylinder on its own. The cylinder rolls up into a holder device, similar to the communicators on Earth: Final Conflict. The screen unrolls when you want to use it. Marry that with some tubes of electrorheological fluid and you could get a flexible screen that becomes a flat, hard surface when unrolled and current flows through it.
The text of the bill reads, in part, that an institute of higher education may not discriminate based on work on ID or "or other alternate theories of the origination and development of organisms." Does this mean that someone who was not hired by a religious college or university (of which I'd bet there are a few in Texas) because of their stance on abortion (due to disagreeing that life begins at conception, for example) would have a case based on this bill? After all, disagreeing with the religious educational institution over the theory of when life begins seems to be a disagreement over an "alternate theory of the origination and development of organisms."
Love for one of her brothers. [Though after what he did at the end of the last book, she may not be so pleased with him. Assuming she survives, which in a GRRM book is not guaranteed.]
Though personally I dislike Cersei as well, there are certainly worse characters. One of her spawn comes to mind.
Patent Troll A licenses patent 123456 to Patent Troll B in exchange for a license to patent 234567. Neither Patent Troll A nor Patent Troll B has any intention to use 123456 or 234567, but technically they're actively licensing their patent portfolio.
Now it's easy to tell if two companies are doing this. Tie ten, twenty, thirty companies and dozens of patents together with shell companies and miles of red tape and it'll be much more difficult to tell this is happening.
They wouldn't even have to stop indexing the MPAA's website. They could simply move any MPAA-related page that come up to the bottom of page 35 of the search results. Same basic effect and they can say "but we still index your page!"
The analogy I heard is that anything you send via email (and I suppose this generalizes to Facebook, Twitter, etc.) is as secure as if you wrote it on a postcard and sent it to the recipient.
Nah, let's just make it "1 strike and you're out". If you introduce a bill that becomes a law and is eventually ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court, you lose your seat in Congress and are barred for some period of time from holding any seat in Congress.
...Breaking other shit by mistake with the update is not nearly as serious as not taking action against a known problem.
Let's say Microsoft writes a patch for an issue affecting 0.01% of its user base and deploys it immediately. The patch fixes the problem that 0.01% of the user base is having, but causes a different problem that 0.02% of its user base encounters. Is that a good thing? Sure, for those people who were affected by the first problem but not the second. Those who were affected by neither don't care. Those who were affected by both are still stuck (albeit with a different problem.) And those who were not affected by the first problem but are affected by the second just got broken.
Now those percentages may sound small, and they are. But even a small percentage of a huge number can lead to a large problem. 0.02 percent of 1 billion (a nice round number that a little Google searching for the total number of PCs in existence found) is 200,000. That means Microsoft just broke close to two hundred thousand machines, assuming all those PCs had an affected version of Windows and installed the patch. Even if you cut that by a factor of ten to account for Linux and Mac installations / people who didn't install the patch immediately / etc, that's still TWENTY THOUSAND machines. I'd call breaking tens of thousands of PCs just a wee bit serious.
Now should Microsoft fix bugs quickly? Sure, but quickly is not the same thing as immediately. They should take a _reasonable_ amount of time to reduce the chances that by fixing Peter they break Paul.
Slashdot Mirror
Or he'll get a book deal (either about his experiences or about network administration best practices) and pay it off with the royalties.
As long as it's not overused and the phone companies don't charge for these messages it'll be fine.
Sony assigns one person (like an intern) to work on a new game, "George the Hot's Zeppelin Racing", and registers a trademark on the abbreviated form of that name. It then files one of these complaints about the domain. Once it has the domain, it cancels the project and reassigns that intern.
The FTC's main site indicates 1-877-FTC-HELP as the phone number to call to file a complaint. Even if they can block phone calls to that number, the FTC's address is listed as:
Federal Trade Commission
600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20580
and I suspect sending a letter to that address re: complaints department would probably get it to the right person.
And yet all the politicians who think we need to enact all these stricter laws when it comes to video game sales will ignore this and try to claim that any 5 year old can walk into a game store and buy GTA IV on their own.
Which is more expensive: buying a politician to kill the bill before it becomes a law or filing a lawsuit to have the law found unconstitutional after the bill has become a law?
No, it shouldn't count as her first strike.
"Compilation" implies to me that multiple files were involved, so it should count as her first and second strikes, and if that compilation involved three or more files her third strike as well.
Perhaps I've played too much Final Fantasy, but when I first read that headline my first thought was of the "minigame" involving infiltrating Don Corneo's villa to rescue Tifa fairly early in the game.
If you don't like it, why? I like my life, where people who commit crimes are actually tracked down by the state and held. You might not believe it, but the police can actually gain access to your house if they can show evidence that you committed a crime.
The latter part of your last sentence is the key. IF they can show evidence that you've done something wrong, then they can ask permission to access information that they otherwise wouldn't be allowed to access.
What type of access restrictions does this license plate image database have? Can any law enforcement officer track any license plate number (like an ex-romantic interest) or does a law enforcement officer need to show a cause to obtain this information? The article wasn't clear on this point.
You know, I think the judge recruitment pool would be rather low if you didn't allow those that have either stood as plaintiffs or defendants as lawyers. Because if they're biased then so is the EFF lawyer too, right? Or is that just the lawyers on the side you don't like.
If a lawyer that worked extensively or exclusively with the EFF became a judge then yes, I would expect them to recuse themselves when a case involving the EFF came before them. Requiring a judge to have no ties to the topic of their case would in some cases be unrealistic (for instance, for a case involving a coffee company you'd have to find a judge that never drank coffee. Probably not going to happen.) Requiring that they were not previously in bed with the topic of their case is not.
I fail to understand the entire roll-up computation field. What's the appeal? Why would I want to carry around a cylinder of material that is easy to crush (and therefore crease, likely destroying in the process) when the same item can be made flat, rigid, and slide easily into my briefcase along with other flat things that I need to carry around? Floppy items are no fun to type on. Curly things are no fun to read.
Can someone explain, please?
You don't carry around the cylinder on its own. The cylinder rolls up into a holder device, similar to the communicators on Earth: Final Conflict. The screen unrolls when you want to use it. Marry that with some tubes of electrorheological fluid and you could get a flexible screen that becomes a flat, hard surface when unrolled and current flows through it.
The text of the bill reads, in part, that an institute of higher education may not discriminate based on work on ID or "or other alternate theories of the origination and development of organisms." Does this mean that someone who was not hired by a religious college or university (of which I'd bet there are a few in Texas) because of their stance on abortion (due to disagreeing that life begins at conception, for example) would have a case based on this bill? After all, disagreeing with the religious educational institution over the theory of when life begins seems to be a disagreement over an "alternate theory of the origination and development of organisms."
How much do you think such a proposal would cost, say, Bruce Schneier when he sends out his Crypto-Gram newsletter to people that have requested it?
Or how about the Linux Kernel Mailing List?
Or the messages Slashdot can send you when someone replies to or moderates your comment? [See the Account link at the top of the screen.]
($0.001 per email) * (many many emails to which the recipient has opted-in) = a lot of money for list owners to pay.
I don't want to see the mailing lists I like all go behind paywalls or stop sending out messages entirely.
My take on this is that if you don't Reply All but forget to send the message to someone, it's easy enough to forward the message to that person.
If you do Reply All and send the message to someone to whom it shouldn't have been sent, it's much less easy to "unsend" the message to that person.
How about the John Jackson party and the Jack Johnson party?
Devotion to her children.
Love for one of her brothers. [Though after what he did at the end of the last book, she may not be so pleased with him. Assuming she survives, which in a GRRM book is not guaranteed.]
Though personally I dislike Cersei as well, there are certainly worse characters. One of her spawn comes to mind.
Won't somebody please think of the proctologists?
How will they stay in business if everyone gets a free exam every time they fly, attend a sporting event, etc.?
Patent Troll A licenses patent 123456 to Patent Troll B in exchange for a license to patent 234567. Neither Patent Troll A nor Patent Troll B has any intention to use 123456 or 234567, but technically they're actively licensing their patent portfolio.
Now it's easy to tell if two companies are doing this. Tie ten, twenty, thirty companies and dozens of patents together with shell companies and miles of red tape and it'll be much more difficult to tell this is happening.
They wouldn't even have to stop indexing the MPAA's website. They could simply move any MPAA-related page that come up to the bottom of page 35 of the search results. Same basic effect and they can say "but we still index your page!"
If they are over 9000 (*sigh*) years old
Really not sure why you are sighing.
I learned it by watching Vegeta!
The analogy I heard is that anything you send via email (and I suppose this generalizes to Facebook, Twitter, etc.) is as secure as if you wrote it on a postcard and sent it to the recipient.
Nah, let's just make it "1 strike and you're out". If you introduce a bill that becomes a law and is eventually ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court, you lose your seat in Congress and are barred for some period of time from holding any seat in Congress.
So are we going to see a Jewish candidate in 2012 running under the slogan "The government's going kosher -- no more pork"?
...Breaking other shit by mistake with the update is not nearly as serious as not taking action against a known problem.
Let's say Microsoft writes a patch for an issue affecting 0.01% of its user base and deploys it immediately. The patch fixes the problem that 0.01% of the user base is having, but causes a different problem that 0.02% of its user base encounters. Is that a good thing? Sure, for those people who were affected by the first problem but not the second. Those who were affected by neither don't care. Those who were affected by both are still stuck (albeit with a different problem.) And those who were not affected by the first problem but are affected by the second just got broken.
Now those percentages may sound small, and they are. But even a small percentage of a huge number can lead to a large problem. 0.02 percent of 1 billion (a nice round number that a little Google searching for the total number of PCs in existence found) is 200,000. That means Microsoft just broke close to two hundred thousand machines, assuming all those PCs had an affected version of Windows and installed the patch. Even if you cut that by a factor of ten to account for Linux and Mac installations / people who didn't install the patch immediately / etc, that's still TWENTY THOUSAND machines. I'd call breaking tens of thousands of PCs just a wee bit serious.
Now should Microsoft fix bugs quickly? Sure, but quickly is not the same thing as immediately. They should take a _reasonable_ amount of time to reduce the chances that by fixing Peter they break Paul.
But we already know how!
"as well". A-S-W-E-L-L. "as well".
She went out on maternity leave, had her baby (end of June 2009), and returned (in an episode that aired in March 2010) already.