There are a lot of posts saying it'd be pretty easy to fake the Facebook post. It wouldn't even have to be technical: Just call your father and ask him to log on to Facebook under your account and post what you tell him to.
The article doesn't say, but what if this was a crime of opportunity? What if the evidence at the scene and witness's testimonies painted a motive that indicated it was a crime of opportunity, and not a pre-planned crime? If that was a case, then accepting a Facebook posting made at the time of the crime seems pretty reasonable. Maybe he called his father just after the crime, but one minute after an unplanned crime? That feels unlikely to me, too. And anyways, the court had testimonies and other evidence hinting that he wasn't the guy, so I don't think this will set a precedent that Facebook postings should be accepted without question in court.
If anyone is quickly wondering exactly where he got the info to construct the request URL in his original post (like, how did he know about jftid, jfoid, and jfmid?), it looks like page 33 of the linked Integration Guide PDF gives the URL https://ssl.bing.com/cashback/javascripts/1x1tracking.js. That JavaScript file has info on constructing that URL.
Pretty wild to think that a rise up to 8 kelvin is a "serious overtemp event".
It looks like it rose from approximately 2 Kelvin to 8 Kelvin. The magnet got 4 times as hot as it's supposed to be. And that's actually a very accurate conceptual statement, I think, unlike how 2 degrees Centigrade to 8 degrees Centigrade and 2 degrees Fahrenheit to 8 degrees Fahrenheit are not going to 4 times as hot.
It's still wild to think that such a small change in temperature got the magnets 4 times as much heat energy as they're supposed to have, but it does make the claim that it's a serious overtemp event easier to understand.
, and while they think they are part of a large group ridiculing management and the corporate culture, the end effect of this effort is not change or revolution, but, au contraire, submission, acceptance and cooperation.
I don't think this article was written to try and induce change at all. I think the intent of the author was to explain the way things are, and I don't think he thinks he's part of a ridiculing group. It is true, though, that by explaining the way things are, he is probably helping lubricate the workforce, which may be a by-product and not an intent of his post.
I am by no means an expert or even amature cloud identifier, but those look like severe Altostratus Undulatus to me. And actually, ever since the summer of 2005, I've noticed them a lot here near Portland, Maine, when I never noticed them before. When they get well pronounced, it does look Armageddonish.
I found the original article, but it still didn't have the numbers from the test. What it does have is a bar graph jpeg of the results. So I measured them, and the two scores are 24 pixels and 232 pixels. 232/24=9.68, which is close to that 9.6 number they're giving.
But, they were saying it was 9.6 times faster. That is wrong. It is 9.6 times as fast, or 8.6 times faster. It bugs me when people get that wrong.
Maybe it can be argued that the state of Oregon owns the copyright to the book, and the citizens of Oregon own Oregon, therefor the citizens of Oregon own the copyright to the book? That argument would be valid, but maybe not sound.
Chief among this year's actions were five separate law enforcement raids against game pirates in California, resulting in the seizure of several thousand games and dozens of modded consoles, and the arrests of five individuals.
It sounds like you could get the same thing from raiding any dorm hall on my university campus. This is a sound bite, good for news media to repeat, and to me it makes what could be a completely legal community sound like a gang of high profile game-pirate-for-profit lords.
Oh yeah, of course. I forgot reality is 3D:). Hmm, then I wonder if we could be seeing this planet part way through its rotation/perturbation, and that's why we can't see the other planet that caused it? No, we can tell the rotation of the star, too, so we must know its plane intersects us.
But it might be possible you can do it by gradually perturbing the orbit through the influence of a second planet. So far, we haven't found any evidence of a second planet there.
Wouldn't a slowly perturbed planet fall into it's star once it reached stand still or near to it? Or maybe it was perturbed while way out far from the star, and then managed to reverse and miss the star as it fell towards it, and somehow got a near circular orbit again. I'd like to see what the path for a theoretical gradual perturbation and orbit reversal would look like.
I sort of do this in Heroes of Might and Magic sometimes. Even though for the most part it doesn't help my character's stats or affect the next level in any way, I tend to search for and visit every object on the map, and build out my city to the fullest, before doing the last action to complete a level.
The article says that digital purchases were down from 2007 to 2008, but the graphic shows that both download album and download single peaked in 2008, meaning they rose from 2007 to 2008. Did I mis-interpret or miss something?
The proposed ban on P2P software in government agencies is not what surprises me. I think work locations should have a bunch of leeway in discouraging or banning non-work related, distracting, or potentially damaging activities.
Rather, it's the suggestion that this is all LimeWire's fault that catches me. I just downloaded and installed LimeWire for the first time on this Windows XP machine. After install, it shares nothing from your hard drive. If you click on My Files > Public Shared > Add Files, it brings up the standard browse and select a file window. It starts out in %UserProfile%, which is a bit odd but OK. If you select a folder to share, it asks "What kind of files do you want to share with the world from "folder name" and its subfolders?" (emphasis original).
You couldn't make it any more clear to the user if you hit them with a sledge hammer. I say, if anything is unintentionally shared, full responsibility falls on the user only, and not on this program or its creators.
BTW, this isn't just one guy saying it's LimeWire's fault. TFA says that a couple years ago, a committee told LimeWire "to implement changes in the company's products to make it harder for users to inadvertently share files", and the committee just said that they haven't done enough.
And now to uninstall LimeWire and remove any lingering stuff it leaves behind.
When the precise size matters so much, it would be good for the submitter to use the correct abbreviations. There is no such thing as Kb. A capitol K is never used alone in measuring data amount. 4kb is four kilobits, or 4,000 bits. That's not what the competition's limit is. Neither is it 4kB, which is four kilobytes, or 4,000 bytes, or 32,000 bits. The actual limit is 4KiB, or four kibibytes. That's 4,096 bytes, or 32,768 bits.
There is one thing I don't get with all these "P2P can be the legal solution to all things!" ideas. Especially with a service that has users committing resources, meaning the user is to upload a whole bunch.
With my 3 Mbps down / 768 kbps up DSL internet, I can not upload torrents (such as Linux distros) any faster than 188 kb/s, lest my ping latency, dropped packets, and download speed all hit the fan for all my applications, including web browsing. It's much the same with the 8 Mbps down cable connection at home. And, I believe that if the number of connections I have going at the same time gets too high, some performances in some instances drop. Both ISP's have legalees in the contracts saying that I can't run a server, too. Engaging in P2P, legal or not, may be violating these contracts. And anyways it seems the upload limits, inherit or artificial, do not allow for effecting serving.
So, how does Global Gaming Factory X plan to work with, change, or go around these ISP policies and mind sets? They'll have to have very low resource requirements, and make sure the networks have plenty of big player uploaders sitting on fat pipes or unusual ISPs. That, or hope that introducing a pay wall won't disrupt the natural self-building that current P2P networks have, even though even that is hardly reliable.
In fact, I wouldn't even trust the results if I asked 10 lawyers who were all in the same room; my general impression is that when I ask lawyers a question who are in the room together, they agree more frequently than if I ask them a similar question separately, perhaps consciously or subconsciously out of a desire to make it look as if the "expert consensus" is stronger than it really is.
I RTF Brief. It was a good read. There is one issue that was mentioned and claimed to be explored, but I don't understand the reasoning.
In the last paragraph of discussion B.3.A and in foot note 10, on page 19, they say that the customer is the only one that makes the copy through RS-DVR, with some help from the respondents (the cable company). In fact, through out the brief, it is emphasized that who makes the copy is very important, and in this case it is always the customer that does.
But, this paragraph and foot note strikes me. It says that it is possible that two parties at once both be the "who" and who makes a copy. Like "if one person selects the programs or documents to be copied, but hires someone else to push the buttons used to operate the relevant copying machine, it is possible that both could be held liable as direct infringes for any copyright violations that their conduct entails." The brief argues that this doesn't happen; the customer makes the selection and pushes the button.
Why is pushing the button important? If a customer makes a selection but no button is pushed, then nothing has happened. If a company pushes a button but no selection was made before then, then again nothing happens. The customer is always the one that makes the selection; pushing a button is the extension of that selection. Hmm, maybe it is important, actually.
But, in the case of RS-DVR, the company is pushing some buttons of several kinds. The customer can make a decision, then press a button on their remote. This button press is sent to the RS-DVR server at the company's location, and the server presses it's own internal buttons to set the recording time and channel, and then presses some more when the right time comes. If these internal server buttons were not pressed, then nothing would happen. To me, they look just as important to the process as the remote control.
Hmm, maybe the server's internal buttons usage are considered a service, while the remote control's buttons usage is not?
I think the only thing that's clear here is that I'm not familiar enough with this aspect of law to figure it out conclusively myself.
Yeah, I've noticed that Photosynth view is sometimes very reluctant or sluggish to give you a higher resolution. In a single synth, there will usually be some photos that get highest resolution right away, and others that will never ever go higher than a blurry blurb.
One time, on a certain photo, I noticed that if I resized the browser window to be a little smaller than full screen, the photo became instantly clear. But, as soon as I moved the window size bigger than some threshold, it went blurry again. The actual size of the photo changed with the browser resize, so maybe I was hitting a zoom level where it wanted to download a higher clarity version of the photo. But, why go back to clarity 0 while waiting for clarity 2 to download, when you have clarity 1 sitting there?
They have made the point cloud and quad (faded photos near the one you are currently focused on) better and faster recently. There was one synth that had well placed highlights, such that as the viewer went from one to another, the camera went through and displayed a bunch of photos on the way, so you could really get a feel of the layout and feel like you're walking through the place.
Slashdot Mirror
There are a lot of posts saying it'd be pretty easy to fake the Facebook post. It wouldn't even have to be technical: Just call your father and ask him to log on to Facebook under your account and post what you tell him to.
The article doesn't say, but what if this was a crime of opportunity? What if the evidence at the scene and witness's testimonies painted a motive that indicated it was a crime of opportunity, and not a pre-planned crime? If that was a case, then accepting a Facebook posting made at the time of the crime seems pretty reasonable. Maybe he called his father just after the crime, but one minute after an unplanned crime? That feels unlikely to me, too. And anyways, the court had testimonies and other evidence hinting that he wasn't the guy, so I don't think this will set a precedent that Facebook postings should be accepted without question in court.
If anyone is quickly wondering exactly where he got the info to construct the request URL in his original post (like, how did he know about jftid, jfoid, and jfmid?), it looks like page 33 of the linked Integration Guide PDF gives the URL https://ssl.bing.com/cashback/javascripts/1x1tracking.js. That JavaScript file has info on constructing that URL.
Here's the Slashdot story from 5 years ago: Slashdot | Firefox 1.0 Released
Pretty wild to think that a rise up to 8 kelvin is a "serious overtemp event".
It looks like it rose from approximately 2 Kelvin to 8 Kelvin. The magnet got 4 times as hot as it's supposed to be. And that's actually a very accurate conceptual statement, I think, unlike how 2 degrees Centigrade to 8 degrees Centigrade and 2 degrees Fahrenheit to 8 degrees Fahrenheit are not going to 4 times as hot.
It's still wild to think that such a small change in temperature got the magnets 4 times as much heat energy as they're supposed to have, but it does make the claim that it's a serious overtemp event easier to understand.
I've been checking Google Flu Trends every couple weeks, and at least some metric is now much higher than it has been in years past.
, and while they think they are part of a large group ridiculing management and the corporate culture, the end effect of this effort is not change or revolution, but, au contraire, submission, acceptance and cooperation.
I don't think this article was written to try and induce change at all. I think the intent of the author was to explain the way things are, and I don't think he thinks he's part of a ridiculing group. It is true, though, that by explaining the way things are, he is probably helping lubricate the workforce, which may be a by-product and not an intent of his post.
For those who aren't sure where that triangle is, a map.
Forgot to link a useful Google image search: Altostratus Undulatus - Google Images
I am by no means an expert or even amature cloud identifier, but those look like severe Altostratus Undulatus to me. And actually, ever since the summer of 2005, I've noticed them a lot here near Portland, Maine, when I never noticed them before. When they get well pronounced, it does look Armageddonish.
I found the original article, but it still didn't have the numbers from the test. What it does have is a bar graph jpeg of the results. So I measured them, and the two scores are 24 pixels and 232 pixels. 232/24=9.68, which is close to that 9.6 number they're giving.
But, they were saying it was 9.6 times faster. That is wrong. It is 9.6 times as fast, or 8.6 times faster. It bugs me when people get that wrong.
Maybe it can be argued that the state of Oregon owns the copyright to the book, and the citizens of Oregon own Oregon, therefor the citizens of Oregon own the copyright to the book? That argument would be valid, but maybe not sound.
Chief among this year's actions were five separate law enforcement raids against game pirates in California, resulting in the seizure of several thousand games and dozens of modded consoles, and the arrests of five individuals.
It sounds like you could get the same thing from raiding any dorm hall on my university campus. This is a sound bite, good for news media to repeat, and to me it makes what could be a completely legal community sound like a gang of high profile game-pirate-for-profit lords.
Each is 2.7mm thick
That's 30 sheets of copy paper.
Oh yeah, of course. I forgot reality is 3D :). Hmm, then I wonder if we could be seeing this planet part way through its rotation/perturbation, and that's why we can't see the other planet that caused it? No, we can tell the rotation of the star, too, so we must know its plane intersects us.
But it might be possible you can do it by gradually perturbing the orbit through the influence of a second planet. So far, we haven't found any evidence of a second planet there.
Wouldn't a slowly perturbed planet fall into it's star once it reached stand still or near to it? Or maybe it was perturbed while way out far from the star, and then managed to reverse and miss the star as it fell towards it, and somehow got a near circular orbit again. I'd like to see what the path for a theoretical gradual perturbation and orbit reversal would look like.
And now for a more meaningful and comprehensible number: At least 61% of the document is blacked out.
I sort of do this in Heroes of Might and Magic sometimes. Even though for the most part it doesn't help my character's stats or affect the next level in any way, I tend to search for and visit every object on the map, and build out my city to the fullest, before doing the last action to complete a level.
Nice to know know I'm not alone.
The article says that digital purchases were down from 2007 to 2008, but the graphic shows that both download album and download single peaked in 2008, meaning they rose from 2007 to 2008. Did I mis-interpret or miss something?
The proposed ban on P2P software in government agencies is not what surprises me. I think work locations should have a bunch of leeway in discouraging or banning non-work related, distracting, or potentially damaging activities.
Rather, it's the suggestion that this is all LimeWire's fault that catches me. I just downloaded and installed LimeWire for the first time on this Windows XP machine. After install, it shares nothing from your hard drive. If you click on My Files > Public Shared > Add Files, it brings up the standard browse and select a file window. It starts out in %UserProfile%, which is a bit odd but OK. If you select a folder to share, it asks "What kind of files do you want to share with the world from "folder name" and its subfolders?" (emphasis original).
You couldn't make it any more clear to the user if you hit them with a sledge hammer. I say, if anything is unintentionally shared, full responsibility falls on the user only, and not on this program or its creators.
BTW, this isn't just one guy saying it's LimeWire's fault. TFA says that a couple years ago, a committee told LimeWire "to implement changes in the company's products to make it harder for users to inadvertently share files", and the committee just said that they haven't done enough.
And now to uninstall LimeWire and remove any lingering stuff it leaves behind.
When the precise size matters so much, it would be good for the submitter to use the correct abbreviations. There is no such thing as Kb. A capitol K is never used alone in measuring data amount. 4kb is four kilobits, or 4,000 bits. That's not what the competition's limit is. Neither is it 4kB, which is four kilobytes, or 4,000 bytes, or 32,000 bits. The actual limit is 4KiB, or four kibibytes. That's 4,096 bytes, or 32,768 bits.
There is one thing I don't get with all these "P2P can be the legal solution to all things!" ideas. Especially with a service that has users committing resources, meaning the user is to upload a whole bunch.
With my 3 Mbps down / 768 kbps up DSL internet, I can not upload torrents (such as Linux distros) any faster than 188 kb/s, lest my ping latency, dropped packets, and download speed all hit the fan for all my applications, including web browsing. It's much the same with the 8 Mbps down cable connection at home. And, I believe that if the number of connections I have going at the same time gets too high, some performances in some instances drop. Both ISP's have legalees in the contracts saying that I can't run a server, too. Engaging in P2P, legal or not, may be violating these contracts. And anyways it seems the upload limits, inherit or artificial, do not allow for effecting serving.
So, how does Global Gaming Factory X plan to work with, change, or go around these ISP policies and mind sets? They'll have to have very low resource requirements, and make sure the networks have plenty of big player uploaders sitting on fat pipes or unusual ISPs. That, or hope that introducing a pay wall won't disrupt the natural self-building that current P2P networks have, even though even that is hardly reliable.
In fact, I wouldn't even trust the results if I asked 10 lawyers who were all in the same room; my general impression is that when I ask lawyers a question who are in the room together, they agree more frequently than if I ask them a similar question separately, perhaps consciously or subconsciously out of a desire to make it look as if the "expert consensus" is stronger than it really is.
This would be an example of the conformity experiments performed by the social psychologist Solomon Asch in the 1950's: Asch conformity experiments - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I RTF Brief. It was a good read. There is one issue that was mentioned and claimed to be explored, but I don't understand the reasoning.
In the last paragraph of discussion B.3.A and in foot note 10, on page 19, they say that the customer is the only one that makes the copy through RS-DVR, with some help from the respondents (the cable company). In fact, through out the brief, it is emphasized that who makes the copy is very important, and in this case it is always the customer that does.
But, this paragraph and foot note strikes me. It says that it is possible that two parties at once both be the "who" and who makes a copy. Like "if one person selects the programs or documents to be copied, but hires someone else to push the buttons used to operate the relevant copying machine, it is possible that both could be held liable as direct infringes for any copyright violations that their conduct entails." The brief argues that this doesn't happen; the customer makes the selection and pushes the button.
Why is pushing the button important? If a customer makes a selection but no button is pushed, then nothing has happened. If a company pushes a button but no selection was made before then, then again nothing happens. The customer is always the one that makes the selection; pushing a button is the extension of that selection. Hmm, maybe it is important, actually.
But, in the case of RS-DVR, the company is pushing some buttons of several kinds. The customer can make a decision, then press a button on their remote. This button press is sent to the RS-DVR server at the company's location, and the server presses it's own internal buttons to set the recording time and channel, and then presses some more when the right time comes. If these internal server buttons were not pressed, then nothing would happen. To me, they look just as important to the process as the remote control.
Hmm, maybe the server's internal buttons usage are considered a service, while the remote control's buttons usage is not?
I think the only thing that's clear here is that I'm not familiar enough with this aspect of law to figure it out conclusively myself.
Yeah, I've noticed that Photosynth view is sometimes very reluctant or sluggish to give you a higher resolution. In a single synth, there will usually be some photos that get highest resolution right away, and others that will never ever go higher than a blurry blurb.
One time, on a certain photo, I noticed that if I resized the browser window to be a little smaller than full screen, the photo became instantly clear. But, as soon as I moved the window size bigger than some threshold, it went blurry again. The actual size of the photo changed with the browser resize, so maybe I was hitting a zoom level where it wanted to download a higher clarity version of the photo. But, why go back to clarity 0 while waiting for clarity 2 to download, when you have clarity 1 sitting there?
They have made the point cloud and quad (faded photos near the one you are currently focused on) better and faster recently. There was one synth that had well placed highlights, such that as the viewer went from one to another, the camera went through and displayed a bunch of photos on the way, so you could really get a feel of the layout and feel like you're walking through the place.
I wonder if that protein could be used to make real world Rad-X as from the Fallout series?