0
stringlengths 9
22.1k
|
|---|
I believe those are nominal numbers - ie, shipments per quarter .
We'd need to know total shipments per quarter as well, and we could assume that each device has a lifespan of, say, 6 quarters. So go back 6 quarters, sum up the total shipments * shipment share and then you'll have the total number of devices sold by type, divide that by the total number shipped over all 6 quarters and you'll have what we really care about -- total user base share.
This chart tells us, more or less, which company is most popular right now and which one may make more sense to invest in. But it doesn't tell us which one we are most likely to see if you encounter a tablet in the wild. |
None of us. For a start, they make them too long and complicated to read. They all need a " |
Based upon rates that only factor the cost of the panels solar is cheap.
Its built because it is highly subsidized not just with government grants but with how utilities are forced to carry/take the power even if unnecessary at the time, for home installs, while not being able to charge connection fees for use of the lines (in some areas).
They "need" to be pressured and are resistant because switching to solar costs millions in grid upgrades to be able to manage the inconsistent power they provide. Also, because these small scale solar operation can threaten their core business if they also happen to produce power.
as to why we make anyone use it, well the simple answer is its considered a more environmentally friendly method of power production the other methods.....though reality is, its on par with wind, hydro, and nuclear (the leftovers can be disposed of safely). |
My take on this:
Reddit is a huge echo chamber when it comes to liberal American politics. There's an equally loud opposing side, but they don't frequent reddit as much. Those that do frequent reddit don't talk politics because they get downvoted into oblivion. Here, the opposition to various governmental defense programs seems absolute (which is a fairly common liberal American viewpoint), but for the American public at large, it's not so one sided.
Keep in mind that I'm not giving an opinion one way or the other on those programs, but I'm merely trying to explain what I feel like is a misperception that's due to being on this website frequently. |
The Palantir are just a network. It's Sauron who corrupts. That part of Sauron exists in/touches the network means anyone (at that time) accessing the network exposes themselves to that corruption (and their location to Sauron) as well.
Once the Palantir are no longer in Sauron's control (or in the control of those he corrupts), it should be possible to purge any remaining "taint" from the network, making it at least somewhat "safe" to use. |
First, see my edit, in which I linked to the actual court decision, and quoted its logic.
> define machine consumption because i can set up a toolchain to process and run traditional source code
The point is that source code is often used by humans to talk with each other, and the "Supreme Court has explained that “all ideas having even the slightest redeeming social importance,” including those concerning “the advancement of truth, science, morality, and arts” have the full protection of the First Amendment."
The fact that source code can be used for humans to express ideas to each other means that transmission of source code can't be restricted.
You're also confusing 'assembly' (which is textual, human readable source code for machine code) with machine/object code itself, which is not customarily readable by humans. Although machine code intended for human consumption (eg efficiency analysis and discussion of compiler output) might also be protected. |
One more time, buddy - I'm basically just [quoting this court decision that established First Amendment protections for source code]( because it is a means for humans to express ideas to each other.
In the words of the decision, source code is functional and EXPRESSIVE but object code is by default assumed to be merely functional (if only because the plaintiff never claimed otherwise, but demanded the right to export source code). |
object code is indeed human readable
The courts would probably argue that source code has an expressive purpose , and that mere readability is not sufficient for this purpose. Object code is the result of taking expressive material (source code) and processing it into a form that is far less optimal for expression.
It will be hard to argue "I compiled this program and made it much harder to read so we can discuss it."
I can 'read' a cannon barrel and understand how it works, but it is mainly functional. The blueprint for a cannon barrel, if meant at least in part to discuss cannon barrel design, would be expressive, however (though national security considerations can trump First Amendment expression).
You'll note that the legal pioneers who forced the government to allow crypto export never even attempted your 'object code is expression' idea. Probably, they assumed it wouldn't fly. |
Can someone give me a bullet list |
The issue is that when the Telecommunications Act of 1996 was enacted, people were connecting to the internet with dial-up. The providers generally had nothing to do with the phone line that came into your home. You could choose between AOL, Earthlink, Prodigy, etc etc. The FCC wanted these services to grow and invest so they created the "information services" title to provide a category that wasn't under as heavy regulation as telecommunications were. It made sense because users had a variety of choices.
The problem today is that consumer choice has all but been eliminated. You've got maybe a decision between two providers. There's no competition. You either accept or or not. So while the service provided is similar to the old days of AOL/Earthlink/etc providing you a gateway to the internet on top of your phone line that you paid for from one of the Baby Bells, you don't have the competition necessary to protect customers. |
To be fair, att sales reps tend to be dumb as bricks. Our IT guy made me sit in their sales pitch where they explained that their cloud data warehouse and shiny new VPN services were totally worth $100 extra per month. The look on the guys face when he asked him for clarification about what the 'data warehouse in the cloud meant exactly' was priceless. The guy had literally no idea about what he was selling, he had memorized a sales pitch. |
It is so weird that you say that. And Haybro too.
The article says they claim it will be 51% cheaper than windmills, and 30% less efficient, but you can double the density.
In short, if their claims are true, the article suggests they're cheaper. |
my upvote count says at least 58 others, too!
there are so many potentially interesting articles on reddit everyday, there really is no time to read them all, so skipping the article and going directly to the comments usually provides a good enough overview of the article, especially since comments provide obviously subjective commentary, which help seeing the source in a different light as well. on top of that, I am not a very observant person in these matters. I am not able to read hidden agendas between the lines of articles, but reddit comments usually point these out one way or another. I don't necessarily have to agree with them, but at least I was made aware of their possible existance
also, whenever I join the discussion, it is usually only directly related to comments I read here |
Because 6 seconds would be optimal operation that no one will ever receive.
Because streaming adds network overhead and it is actually more efficient to just send the whole file and play it back locally. Our network speeds have been slow enough up until now that the loss in efficiency was actually more beneficial to the user experience. That might not be the case with 5G.
Because when they build 5G hotspots into your car, there will be 3 - 5 passengers on your roadtrip all trying to stream video.
Because "movie" is the easiest way to express the technical details to people who don't understand the jargon. That 6 seconds contains gigs of data, which could be anything. Maybe medical imagery that's being used in a mobile lab. Movies, music, games, and VOIP are about the only data whose transfer is bottlenecked by your own sensory experience. |
Quoting directly from the PDF linked earlier ITT.
4.
>The browser fetches all available suggested tiles based on country and language from Onyx without using cookies or other user tracking identifiers.
5.
>User interactions, such as clicks, pins and blocks, are examples of data that may be measured and processed. View Mozilla’s Privacy Policy or our Data Privacy Principles for more information.
6.
>Onyx submits the interaction data to Disco, a restricted access database for large-scale analysis.
7.
>Disco aggregates all Firefox tiles interactions, anonymizing personally identifiable data before sending to Redshift for reporting.
8.
>Charts and reports are pulled from Redshift using Zenko, a Content Services reporting tool, for analysis by Mozilla. Mozilla sends this report to the partner shortly after the campaign ends. |
The part where I am confused is that AFAIK phones don't emit radiation in any substantial quantity (no more than say a wristwatch) unless they are transmitting. Was the phone on and in a call the whole time or just sitting there powered up doing nothing beyond displaying the time? Also, was there a control study of phones with their batteries pulled near a hive? Maybe the phone did cause a problem, but perhaps it was some chemical emissions and not EM radiation. |
I grew up in upstate NY without cell service, and consequently did not buy a cell phone till I went away to college in NYC a few years ago. After a painful year with a tracfone I bought the iPhone a couple days after it came out.
In the beginning life was good, I screwed around and jailbroke...had fun with cool apps, google maps made driving in unknown areas less stressful, everything really felt slick and ahead of the curve.
Fast forward to 2009. Things get worse and worse, in the spring my phone works 80% of the time, by fall 50-60% of the time. Sometimes it will shit out 20 voicemails after a week of nothing, more often then not it will fail to make calls or drop them. With full bars & 3G I can't send a text. The worst is when I have a business call or a medical call and I drop it over and over and over and over again, calling back and apologizing every time.
I've brought my phone to various AT&T stores trying to switch out with something, even the shittiest thing so I can have a working phone...they always tell me it might be a dirty sim and offer to switch it out (didn't work, hurfdurf). The last time I got belligerent over the fact that their shit service makes me look so fucking unprofessional and they asked me to leave. There's only so many times people will believe you when you say "i never got your voicemail/call" or that I couldn't pick up when I actually did get the call or that I sound like a retard-in-a-hurry on the phone because it's such bad quality and I'm afraid it's going to drop.
I'm at wit's end, my contract is for 1 1/2 more years, I can't upgrade/change phones for 6+ months and I've come to rely on the convenience of the iPhone's email and apps (yelp, movies, dropbox, ireddit, etc...) so even if I can ditch I'm between a rock and a hard place. |
I know how this guy feels, to an extent. Back in 2003, I was fired from my Apple retail job for accidentally publishing screenshots of the Apple Internal Software that is used for bug tracking, repair tracking, and the like. I didn't explicitly publish and/or promote it, but when a slashdot story I submitted was accepted people started poking my screenshot directory on my website, and then spread around the fact there were Apple Internal screenshots. I was 19 at the time, and I was really proud to have been opening an Apple retail story (pre-ipod, mind you) and being fired from a company that I loved, albeit from a relatively lame position was really quite devastating.
One of the websites that blogged about it was pbzone.com, and they (alone) took the extra step of publishing my name, address, phone number, and AIM. I was living on campus at the time (also at North Carolina State University in EE, coincidentally enough), and the only way I found about everything was coming back from class to a screen full of IMs from people I've never seen and an inbox full of email. I emailed them and asked them to take it down but they refused. People who contacted me were about 80% friendly at first, but it got ugly as time went on. It was all very surreal, being talked about online by people you don't know. This was really before it was "commonplace" for people to be fired for blogging or for other internet mishaps, so a lot of sites were talking about it...I was even in print, which was really surprising.
Being fired from Apple relatively publicly and the ensuing 15 minutes of fame had a lot of unexpected 'benefits', if you will. I got a few job offers for EE internships around here from sympathetic people. I also met so many great people as a result. Some of my best friends I have today I met as a sole result of being fired from Apple and the little online firestorm. I met my longest-running boyfriend, became closer to a lot of my friends, and made a lot of friends in a lot of places that I still keep in touch with today.
Of course I wasn't an Apple engineer who left a prototype at a bar, but I can empathize with what he must be feeling and going through as a result. It isn't the end of the road for him, to be sure. Of course there were some negative results having been let go from Apple, not the least of which probably axed my chance of having a 'real' engineering job with them at any point in the future. I wish this guy the best of luck. |
I'm a [panentheist]( and therefore a [monist]( So not unitarian, but certainly not trinitarian in the traditional sense.
I'm a literalist with enough sense to look things up in Greek and Hebrew--so while I can say with certainty that a serpent and not The Debbil was doing the tempting in Eden, I'm also comfortable with the idea that "yom" can mean "a period of time" and, keeping that in mind, the Genesis creation story is a fair description of what was going on--understandable to the average dude in 2000 B.C. (I mean really, what's the functional difference between "let there be light" and "so there was this big bang"?).
Regarding being a monarchist I came to it solely through statistics demonstrating that democracy is unviable.
That is, if the average IQ is 100 and standard deviation is 15 points and it takes an IQ of 115 to really prepare someone for critical thinking, then something like less than 25% of the population can actually think for themselves.
The others are "sheeple" to abuse the meme.
Because this is true--and because it is always in the best interest of one political group to dilute suffrage (meaning that republics will always devolve into democracies/mobocracies {see Skip Knox's I went looking for other governmental options.
Monarchy is the most viable as it requires a commitment to the well-being of the state (as the state is the de facto, if not de jure property of the monarch) without an attachment to the manipulatable will of the people.
A bad monarch can be devastating but is relatively easy to get rid of (it's just one neck after all), bad people get you the French or Russian or Nazi or Cambodian revolutions (and have many millions of necks).
The real problem is bureaucracy (just as the real economic problem is corporatism) but a monarch has more incentive--and moreover more ability--to eliminate an entrenched bureaucracy than any democratic government (as the bureaucracy can just use its power to influence public opinion). |
9. Facebook's CEO has a documented history of unethical behavior
I heard he raped and murdered a girl in 1990. I'm not saying it's true, but it does raise some interesting concerns.
>1. The Facebook application itself sucks |
Right on. As strongly as I feel about privacy, I can see how they could mess this one up - it kind of makes sense to look for people you might already know; lots of social apps (I'm thinking of linkedin, facebook) do this in one form or another.
The way Path handled this is the right way . Upfront. Honest. Listening to community feedback and changing course to please The People. Nobody's perfect. So, I hope we'll all give credit where it's due for these folks taking the high road here and making things right. |
Gonna gloss over the downsides to that? Like the only form of birth control we do have control over significantly lowers the enjoyment of the act, and in fact makes it impossible to finish for some men? How about the fact that if my girl is on the pill I get to trust her to take it at the same time every day and never forget. If she gets pregnant from forgetting it or just plain lying, I get to pay for 18 years. I don't have control over that. Also, if you have insurance, it's not particularly expensive.
I would gladly and without hesitation pay for and take full responsibility for birth control if it meant I could have full enjoyment sex and full control of the birth control. I'm pretty sure I'm not the only guy that feels this way. Hell, the only reason I haven't had someone take cut into my balls and tie them off is because it's not always reversible. |
I've had corrective surgery on my foreskin because it was too tight, twice. This involves you having to take an anastaetic shot directly in the head of your penis. Let me tell you something, it kinda sucks, like a tiny bee-sting on your dong, but it passes rapidly.
I don't think this would be anywhere near that pain so stop being little bitches. Your girlfriends/sexpartners/wives whatever go through harder shit every time they have their periods. |
I'm going to take the long way around this answer with a rambling story about my father.
When I was in my 20's my dad got a vasectomy. As a bit of background, my parents were divorced, my dad didn't want any more kids and was dating a woman who also had her own kids.
Anyways, he called me up one day to ask me if I could go with him to the outpatient procedure because he'd need someone to drive him home. I agreed and met him at his house the day of the procedure. We took his car to the clinic, it was about a 30 minute highway drive from his house. He drove.
So we're driving to the clinic, shooting the shit about whatever, and (we're about 5 minutes away now) I notice that a couple times the car has veered over onto the shoulder rumble strips and quickly corrected. Then it happens again and I was almost about to correct it myself and I say "Dad, what's up with your driving?" And he says "Oh they gave me a pill to take before the operation, I think it's kicking in"
I laugh and say "Well Jesus dad, why didn't you just let me drive from home?" and he says he didn't think it would kick in before we got there. So I ask him if he's OK to get us there (we're about a half mile from the freeway exit and the clinic is about a block and a half off of the exit) and he says yes.
So I eagle eye his driving and we pull off the freeway. At this point I can see he's getting loopier by the minute but I can actually see the clinic so I figure he can make it. We get to the intersection off the freeway and there's a big accident in the median so there's an ambulance, a few police cars, and a fire truck (he's a fireman). We get directed through the accident scene at a crawl and as we idle past the accident my dad is rubbernecking so hard he is leaning out of the car window. Not just his head, he's shoulders deep outside the window. Then he looks around at all the trucks and cars and flashing lights, slides back down in his seat an turns to me and issues a completely stoned "Woah".
Now I'm no stranger to drugs, but my dad was a pretty straight laced guy (not uptight, just not one to even drink alcohol). So I just fucking lose it. I'm laughing so hard I can barely see through the tears and I say, "Alright Cheech, just cool it and get us into the parking lot before this cop notices you and pulls us over.
So all we have left to do is pull into the parking lot and park. We turn into the lot a little bit too fast and I hear the tires squeak. The driveway is a steep long 50ft. So he has to give it a little more gas to get up the hill. I keep saying 'easy, easy dude, not so much gas'. We level off in the parking lot and we're probably going 20...not super fast, but way too fast for parking speed. Thankfully the lot is empty save a few cars because it just opened. He's driving down the lane and I'm like "Just park, there's nobody here, just get in a spot". He doesn't park and swings us around the next aisle (again, not slowing down at all to take the turn). Then I'm like 'alright, either park now or just stop the car and I'll finish'.
So he whips into a spot and I'm yelling "BRAKES" and he slams on the breaks, we bump into the concrete parking strips as we come to a stop, he bounces off of the steering wheel which makes the horn beep and I look at his face as he's bouncing back in the seat and he starts laughing hysterically. I lose it again with laughter. I turn the car off, take the keys and we get out to walk into the clinic.
As we're walking in he starts listing heavily to the right and angling away from the entrance, he's way off balance and his head leading him like a toddler. I'm about to run up to him to grab him but he all of a sudden holds his arms out to the sides like plane wings and makes the noise of a WWII airplane starting into a strafing run and then starts making machine gun noises as he continues to veer off the sidewalk.
We get in the clinic and I go to the counter to tell them I'm here to check in for my father. Out of the corner of my eye I see my dad way down the hallway in the other direction and I yell "Dad, this way" and without missing a step he does this 180 puts his head down and does this crazyass "Ok serious business" shuffle speed walk back to me and I crack up hysterically again, which makes him laugh hysterically. The nurse says "Well I guess it's safe to assume he's taken the pre-operation medication as directed" and I say "Yep, thank you for an awesome story". They wrangle him off to get his vasectomy an I drive him home afterwards. I could go on about his 30 minute improv songs about 'his noodle' on the drive home but that is another story for another day.
I apologize for the somewhat irrelevant digression, but this topic awoke a fond memory of my father. Hadn't thought about this story in years. |
No. Anyone else would sue, too - plenty of other companies have already sued for the same thing in the past.
This is marketing blackmail, or technically profiteering based on copyright trademark infringement. Chances are, they did try to buy the domain, but the price was disproportionate: if Apple could get it for a hundred bucks - ten times the registar rate - they wouldn't have made a fuss about it.
If this was about something generic, [like "iCloud.com"]( then you might have a point, and they should just cough up the dough - but "iPhone" is a popular, recognizable and registered trademark, and numeric iterations like "iPhone5" clearly fall under the existing naming pattern. |
Depending on how one argues, the SSW could have scored a bigger victory at 4.2% (they're exempt from the 5%-hurdle) because they get to co-form the ruling coalition with SPD and Greens. That coalition has a majority of one seat, so they're going to, if not listen to, then at least make sure not to aggravate the Pirates as those can stabilise the coalition with their six seats.
Also, the pirates had the biggest gain in percentage of all, but depending on POV you can really frame every single party except Die Linke as a winner: The CDU got the biggest percentage (but no more seats than the SPD), the SPD gained five percent, slowly recovering from their Thatcherisms, the Greens have their best result in SH ever, the FDP managed to take the 5% hurdle, once again (ironically, by denouncing the politics of the federal FDP), the pirates went from 1.6 or so to 8.2%, the SSW made some gains and Die Linke got what they deserved for being invisible and incompetent (in SH, not so much in general).
Oh, before I forget it: The NPD (Neonazis) went down from 0.9% to 0.7%, failing to qualify for state funds (1%) the second time in a row.
Have some numbers |
There is no need to worry. This is a 'wake-up call' about phishing.
Phishing is a common scam. As the saying goes, "the problem is halfway between the computer and the seat". If the person gives away his account and password (or in this case verification code), he just gave away his account. The trick here is about how to get the user to give away his account. This just isn't news though. |
I used to be a gentoo user, but Ubuntu was just easier to install. I should probably try Arch, and there's probably some neckbearded Arch user reading this, rubbing his hands together methodically, saying "yesssss." |
I just came back to windows for the first time since leaving the OS for Mac @ 2003.
It seems like the desktop environment is still my go-to environment, and that I use the metro interface like a glorified start menu. Maybe its coming from OSX, it makes sense to me to just use the taskbar like I used my dock in OSX for my daily-use apps, and then use the metro environment like my "launch pad" for mac by just organizing my related apps (Notepad ,XAAMP, Filezilla etc for web development and Steam, Afterburner, etc. for my gaming) into related sections.
Additionally, I like opening the windows explorer directly for file navigation, since everything in the start menu like my documents, Program Files, etc, is essentially like opening a shortcut into the explorer anyway. I understand some people will miss the cascading dropdown navigation that "Program Files" offered in the start menu. I will not.
I also love the way windows has put the "power user" functions, like the task manager, control panel, command (and elevated command) prompts, run, and device manager all together simply by right clicking in the lower left of the desktop (by placing the mouse at the X and Y zero coordinates).
These three concepts, when combined, make up essentially what the Start Menu used to be. I think with the "power user" commands, the application launching, and the navigation separate each functionality will be more intuitive and functional in its own right.
Additionally, without any Live Tiles in my Metro, Windows seems to only take up about 800-900mb of RAM out of 4gb, and @ 4% of a 2.5ghz core2duo at at idle, which seems pretty minimal for a modern windows OS with what is essentially another operating system stapled ontop of it. |
Don't get me wrong, I've used Microsoft products for over 2 decades - and run multiple medium-size networks built on the software. That doesn't mean I'm not already looking at alternatives - in IT it's your job to stay ahead of the technology years down the road and make sure you don't get painted into a corner.
An external cloud is a terrible service - not just for privacy (which, even if you trust the servers at the end, which has never been a good idea since larger data centers are larger targets, but ignoring that all together) - but for the sake of your own financials. The past year I've had to replace 20 Windows XP machines simply because an update after SP3 killed features at random (HDD access [only fails after the patch, reinstalling on the same hardware works perfectly until you update], network file shares [seemingly with no pattern to which are and are not visible - files can be in the same remote share with the same permissions and even the same file size and there is a about an 4/5 chance they will be visible/accessible], anything using an external driver will crash at random [predominantly video and sound cards, whether just the SP3 patch plus same driver prior to it or SP3 + latest driver, both updated and non-updated drivers work without the SP3 patch], user folders get destroyed [seemingly at random, after about a month of SP3, the system will create a new user folder for any domain user accounts without keeping the old documents, desktop, app settings, etc]). I can't explain this without it being Microsoft releasing bad patches to force you to upgrade (all the older Windows 98se machines still go strong [they are used to operate CNCs and things of that nature without network connectivity]).
We can't even reuse the old versions of Office because they are designed not to function properly on Windows 7+. At this point I'm more or less waiting on LibreOffice to reach the interop functionality of MS Office before I switch 90% of the company to Ubuntu (not my personal favorite, but by far the most comprehensible alternative to the average user). |
The secret is to have fun. Iplayed console cod for years, but when I built my PC, I figured that I shouldnt care about KD or anything like that. I aim for fun. I didn't do amazing at first, but with around 500 hours of TF2 under my bealt, I have gotten much better. |
I can't agree more with your comment. I really don't understand why they chose to implement consumer ui features in the new server release. It's supposed to be an enterprise utility os, so why the consumer ui attributes that can't be turned off or removed. It makes me want to stick with 2008r2 for a really long time.
I keep the a console shortcut pinned to the taskbar, along with shortcuts to any other roles that the server has been configured for.... |
Yup. And Windows 95? Everyone hated it. The downfall of MSFT. People hate change. They hate change until they eventually adapt and then after a year or so, they'd kick you in the balls if you asked them to go back.
People are upset about Windows 8 because they don't want change, Gabe is just upset he might lose money. I think people will love Windows 8 once it's been out for awhile, but I think Steam really does have a reason to be scared. I don't think they'll find themselves locked out, I just think Microsoft will eventually have a "Game Store" that's every bit as convenient as Steam and every bit as open to indie devs as Steam. |
As a Linux user, I take the opposite viewpoint. If people are savvy enough, they have Linux as an alternative. But for people like my grandma or my aunt, it would mean I don't have to head out every week because they installed something they shouldn't have.
Locked down app store = more stability, more security, more reliability. Yes, you're robbing Peter to pay Paul, but there's a legitimate space for that. Think of security in the corporate market. Right now, it's great for big shops that run Unix clusters and workstations and have IT departments full of programmers and security experts to lock everything down... But Windows 8 will likely bring that same ecosystem to the small/medium business market as well.
True, there's always the argument that people should be given choice. Have a locked down app store and the ability to not use it if one chooses. But offering that choice means reducing security. Let's look at some examples.
One of the biggest issues in Windows stability through the years has been 3rd party hardware and drivers. People bought the cheapest hardware they could, then blamed windows when it crashed. So MSFT started certifying drivers...but you had the choice to ignore the warning instead of returning the hardware and getting something certified. But no one did.
Security was a problem because originally every account was an administrator account. So fine, Microsoft added an Admin account method and recommended people run as a normal user except when they needed admin privileges (a la Unix model)...but no one followed their advice and people still moaned about security and viruses. So fine, they implemented UAC to pseudo force people in to it. And most people disable that too and continue to complain about security and viruses.
The problem is that when you give people the option, they want to take the intrusive, limiting things out of the way, but then continue to complain about the very problems they set out to solve. How much has bloat, security and stability arguments dogged Windows? Every Mac user I know keeps citing those 3 reasons as why they switched. MSFT is losing marketshare and they need to stop it.
Choice is great for experienced users who know what they're doing. Most people seem to think they know what they're doing when they obviously don't (and this problem plagues the Linux community as well). So the solution to end the complaints is to takeaway the choice. |
I want to run an out of date OS because there are a few things that its successor Windows 7 has removed the ability to do. I happen to want to do a few things that Microsoft doesn't think I need to want to do.
First and foremost, springs to mind the ability to read-and-write raw disk data, a la the Unix "dd" utility. That's a problem because, in my Big Bag O' Things To Do Someday, I have a few projects that require that capability. I have some DOS floppies I want to look at, and I've always wanted to try writing DOS programs. To do either of those things, I require a PC running DOS, but I'm not quite enough of a Luddite to have one of those hanging around. Next best is to run it in a virtual PC, but the only DOS boot media I've been able to find is a set of downloadable programs that, when run, write directly to the raw blocks of the A: drive, creating a DOS boot (or install?) disk. So I have to run that program, then capture an image of the resulting floppy back on my hard drive to use with the virtual machine. I have a floppy drive, and I have my choice of virtual machines--but the programs can't create the disks (and I couldn't image them back to hard drive if I had them from elsewhere) because in Windows 7, they've removed the ability to write/read raw disks. (I consider myself lucky to still be able to write CD-ROMs; I'm sure they'd take that away, too, if they could.) So I can't create the DOS floppies -- and if I could, I can't then create image files back on my hard drive for use with the virtual PC.
All of this is absolutely trivial in Windows XP and earlier, and absolutely impossible (as far as I know) in Windows 7 (and presumably later). Okay, maybe there's some special API trick that lets one bypass the restriction -- but I don't know what it is, or even if it really exists; it's pure conjecture at this point.
Second, just on general principles, sometimes older stuff works better than newer stuff. Transistors' amplification properties aren't quite as linear as those of vacuum tubes; hence tube amps produce better audio. I know guys who can hear the difference. Analog audio recording in general does a better job than digital, of capturing and reproducing subtle nuances. Digital video is horrible, at least at the compression levels most people/producers/manufacturers seem accustomed to using; it is painful to see what should be a smoothly-gradiated sunset rendered as a series of color/luminance steps -- with rectangular pixel-chunks all around the edge, besides. Thank you, JPEG/MPEG artifacts! MP3 is tolerable but only because my ears are going bad; forget it if you're trying to pick out a second or third harmony line that's been compressed away. And I can read my paper books long after your E-book reader's batteries have died.
I'm not saying older technology is always better than new -- I'm happy to have electric light rather than oil lamps, say -- but even that may be a matter of perspective: probably someone who lived most of his life in the oil-lamp days could find a whole bunch of things to dislike about electricity. "You can have light (etc.) only where you can manage to run a wire; I can carry my oil lamp anywhere! " All I can say is, just wait 'til your kids start pooh-poohing the things you currently think are so great! I hope you'll think of me on that day. |
your diatribe against modern recording technology has one merit. analog does sound slightly better than digital, but that's really just down to the compression rate that you use. analog vs. digital video is not even a contest. i don't know where you received or believed that you saw with your own eyes that analog video is better than digital, because it's not even a contest. digital video is far superior to analog in every way. every. way. to say otherwise has no basis in fact, period.
as far as the reset of your nonsense, it basically boils down to this: you want to be able to do something that no one else has given a shit about for the last 20 years, and you're angry because the rest of the world has moved on while you're still trying to catch up. there is no use or need for Dos anymore. there is no use or need for floppies of any kind any more. just because you want to be able to screw around with it doesn't make it valuable.
your paper books will fall apart after a certain number of readings, my ebook will work as long as i recharge, and depending on the reader, i can get up to a month of use out of one charge. my current library which takes up space in my house could fit on one disk the size of my thumbnail. so my 500 pounds worth of books could instead be digital and weigh about .02 ounces.
>"You can have light (etc.) only where you can manage to run a wire; I can carry my oil lamp anywhere!"
one word. flashlight. more words: they also make electric-powered lamps, just like the old days, except that their batteries last longer than oil, the light is brighter, they weigh less, and you don't smell like you took a dip in the gas can after replacing the battery.
the thing is, people like you make IT Security a nightmare for those of us that have to pay attention to those types of things. while you blissfully work away at your antiquated OS, people like me are trying to figure out just how to prevent security break ins and malware infections, but we can't because people like you flat-out refuse (for a variety of non-reasons) to get out of the stone age and upgrade to something that's actually built for this current technological world. |
Sounds like I found one of your hot buttons.
For your information these types of projects are far, far from my only interest; I'm running Win7 64-bit at home and at work. For serious purposes I have absolutely no objection to using the newest stuff, and am in fact quite resentful of the fact that my wife won't yet let me replace an eight-year-old laptop.
On the other hand, on my own time I am by nature the historian/archivist type, and I hate to see "old stuff" deprecated and discarded simply because it's old. If there's one thing for certain in this world, it's that things change, and sometimes old skills, knowledge, and technology can be surprisingly handy. Richard Feynman wrote an interesting essay about how he was able in college to solve calculus problems his frat brothers couldn't, because he had read "old" math books that taught "old" methods that most people had skipped over or forgotten. If you yourself are under fifty years old, you may yet live to see changes that make you really grateful that some museum curator or historical reenactor preserved the knowledge of how to make fire with a bow, or soap out of ashes and pig fat. Once again, mark my words...
In any case, there is absolutely no reason why I should change my nature to suit your convenience/beliefs; I don't let people convert me to their religions, either. Your attitude is just plain arrogant, even snotty, and the very epitome of what's wrong with the way lots and lots of things (and not just information infrastructure) are mishandled throughout the world. You're one of those people that makes things miserable for everybody else, and let's just say I have no sympathy for you. I do however respect your right to believe what you want to, as long as you leave me the hell alone.
Having said that --you clearly believe that "progress" and "moving forward" are automatically good things, but where I come from it's common knowledge that "it ain't necessarily so." There are some people who can't see a beautiful landscape without wanting to pave it and put up a shopping center, and that, in my book, verges on criminal. There's nothing wrong with leaving Nature the hell alone. I put it to you that there's room for some gray in your black-and-white world.
As for your eBook reader, I'm glad you can cram your 500 lbs of books into a tiny thing that will run for a month on a charge, but look at the huge infrastructure that has to be maintained to provide that charge when you need it. You think you're always going to be within spitting distance of a working electrical outlet, don't you? Heh.
Oh, and your reader is not only infrastructurally fragile, it's physically fragile. Will it continue to work acceptably if you're standing up, reading it at face level, and it slips out of your hand onto a tile floor? What if somebody then steps on it before you can stoop down to pick it up? In any of these cases, a paper book gets a scratch, a dent, or a tear, at worst, and I can pick it up and immediately continue reading. You are probably up against a couple hundred dollars' worth of replacement or repair costs, not to mention the time to do those things. I assume that under most reasonable circumstances (stepping onto the subway for your daily commute, or whatever) it's not convenient, at least not quick, and certainly not immediate, to pick up and go on. Win: paper book.
You'd also better hope your little .02-ounce memory-thumbnail doesn't fall out of your hand into the grass, or down the crack between the elevator car and the floor outside (as once happened to an audio cassette of mine). Believe what you like, but these things can and do happen. Are you absolutely certain you can recover/reacquire everything if that happens? I could lose a book overboard from a cruise ship, sure, but I wouldn't lose my whole library. Believe what you like, but these things do happen, and if it happens to you , are you absolutely certain you can reacquire everything? Do you even know absolutely everything that's in your library? I don't know what-all's in mine; I could probably list about 30% of the science fiction, at best, off the top of my head, and almost none of the rest. I sure can't re-create anything that was on the thumbdrive that fell out of my pocket somewhere, a year or two ago, not least because I'm not quite sure what was lost. (I'm sure being organized helps a lot in this area, but I am not gifted with the organization gene.)
It's a simple fact of life that no sane person should deliberately expose himself to the risk of unrecoverable losses, at least not without thinking about it a little. And only an idiot doesn't think about it, and unfortunately the world is full of idiots, so jumping on the latest heavily-advertised bandwagon without thinking -- e.g., going eBook just because "everybody's going eBook" -- comes to look normal, when a generation or two ago such behavior was considered foolhardy and gullible.
That's not to say that I never use modern technology! I do! I'm always hot for the latest ever-larger-capacity thumbdrive. But I never put anything on it that I can't afford to lose, i.e. that isn't also backed up somewhere else. I occasionally use my Gmail inbox as temporary file storage. I'm considering going to streaming NetFlix now that my local Blockbuster store has closed (I haven't tried Redbox but have a hard time believing a little kiosk like that can have much of a selection), but my wife is balking at the expense of a truly decent player; she wants to just go to Radio Shack and pick up some $50 piece of crap, and I'm balking at that. I spend my work nights at my mother's house, writhing under the limitations of her "basic cable" service: that's less service than "standard" cable, for those who've never heard of it. There's absolutely nothing good on, ever . I pay for Internet at her house, just to have someplace else to go, something else to do.
On the other hand, there are in fact a few things that I do "flat-out refuse" (as you put it) to do, at least with my own personal data (at work I do whatever the company wants, no problem): I use thumbdrives etc. but I don't put anything important on them without making damn sure it's backed up someplace. I am very leery of "cloud" storage--the very idea of having my data on someone else's computer gives me the outright heebie-jeebies. Sure, they're "not allowed" to look at it -- but they do anyway. See any "Geek Squad" IAmA thread for proof.
Oh, and while we're at it -- to reference "Men in Black," how many times are you willing to buy the White Album again as the Irresistable Piston Of "Progress" pushes you irrevocably to each new latest-and-greatest audio medium? I wouldn't mind so much if having bought a 45 rpm single back in 1970 automatically made me eligible for free upgrades to each new medium as the old became obsolete -- but of course they don't do that. I resent the arrogant assumption that I should just bow down and accept the idea of paying for the exact same things over and over again just because somebody else is driving change-for-change's-sake. (In the 1970s when the first wisps of this sort of behavior were starting to become visible, it was called "planned obsolescence" and was considered a social ill. But you kids have grown up thinking it's normal. That's very bad.) Anyway, it is very, very clear, from a number of angles, that the music and movie industries long ago identified a huge cash cow, and have been doing everything they can, ever since, to keep it mooing.
Still, I am willing to change. I will happily discard my records and tapes if you will personally guarantee to replace each and every track with a copy in a "modern" digital format, first . Heck, I'll even let you skip the album tracks I don't actually like, which is probably a fair majority. (Actually, one of my other ongoing projects is the gradual conversion of my large collection of records and tapes into digital form. I trust you approve of the goal, if not the effort.)
Sorry about the rambling, here. I have hot buttons of my own. There's lots more where all this came from. |
My personal take on it is just "meh who cares". It doesn't obstruct my own or anyone elses lives, has the potential to help society, and no real harm unless you go around acting like you want to plant bombs at various public places.
There are no escalation of privileges currently going on and TrapWire was founded about a decade ago... These cameras and there feeds would have existed with or without TrapWire and its databasing, the databasing simply makes it more effective at its job (ideally).
Hell to me Google street view is a larger privacy violation as its fully on the internet and is EVERYWHERE.
Most people in a modern society not wearing tinfoil garments/headwear pretty much accept that they are being filmed when they go to a bank, casino, active transit stations, etc. I personally don't see anything wrong with CCTV's and the like.
To |
He does the right thing and this is how we, as a country,
What right thing? The incident was publicly reported to the media the day it occurred, the only thing Manning did was leak a classified video which still showed what was reported. The only difference is the video got public attention because the majority of the public has to have everything spoon fed.
Manning did nothing right.
> repay him for his risk.
He is being tried for being a triator to his country, and the service which he took an oath to serve under, he didn't jump on a live grenade.
> It's not like he didn't expect to feel the full force of military wrath come pounding down on his head.
Then why didn't he turn himself in or admit to it when he was found out? Why did it take a confession from a 3rd party to implicate him? I'll tell you why, because he was trying to hide.
> He was just knew that what he saw was wrong, and needed to be exposed to the American people because it was being done in their names and with their money.
Why don't you give us a list of all those war crimes you seem to believe he exposed. Please by all means.\
> he most fucked up thing about the military law/civilian law issue is that Bradley Manning will, at least, go to prison for the rest of his life, and the guys who committed the dirty deeds will get commendations, and fat pensions when they retire.
The pilots who was responsible for the act were not awarded, they were punished. Manning deserves every traitors punishment, execution.
> |
No fucker reads anything any more. They should rename this site "clickedit". |
Throwing all the blame on the current administration isn't just fearmongering, its just flat-out inaccurate.
Oh, I completely, 100% agree. My dislike of Obama makes a lot of people jump to conclusions about my reasons or where exactly I place the blame. He's orders of magnitude better than Bush, or Romney, or McCain, or Kerry, or Bush Sr, or Nixon, or Regan; and, many, many of our current problems are the fault of previous administrations and/or congress. I think I'm missing your 9/11 connection, though.
I'll try to get more specific with my reasons (although I'm missing some):
Obama is in a unique position of power which gives him the ability to directly affect a lot of positive change in this country (I'll leave out the comment about how much "change" he promised and how little there has been ;)). As an example, simply by publicly supporting gay rights in the way he has, he's affected a good bit of change in that arena: DADT, and setting things in motion toward actual marriage equality. While one cannot place the blame for domestic surveillance completely on him, by coming out against it in the same way he has about gay rights, he could easily enact positive change. If he publicly came out and said that all of the domestic surveillance programs, NSA call/test/email monitoring, social network monitoring, etc. must end immediately, and then did whatever he could to that affect through the executive branch, and asked congress to enact laws against this shit, he could easily put a dent in it if not eliminate it. Are there excuses? Totally. Political pressure, fear of a JFK-style assassination, fear of not getting re-elected, fear of looking weak on terrorism, pissing off his campaign donors and corporate connections--sure. However I don't want a president that will put any of these reasons before the basic freedoms and right to privacy of the american public.
The drug war, the DEA, and marijuana: Also inherited, but as above, he could single-handedly enact a lot of positive change in this area, but chooses not to. In fact, he chooses to completely defy logic on the issue, and refuses to speak publicly and respond to direct, logical questions about the issue. As an example of the kind of positive change he can easily make, he fixed the Crack<->Cocaine sentencing disparity , with 85% time served being mandatory? For selling a fucking plant? When we have more prisoners both in number and per-capita than any other country in the world by a large margin? I'm not even talking about legalization. The DEA are raiding medical marijuana dispensaries left and right (twice as much as under Bush). Obama smoked marijuana when he was younger. Under his own laws, his life would have been ruined had he been caught. No chance at ever making president, for damn sure. In my eyes, his drug policy is complete illogical hypocritical bullshit and I take it pretty personally. And don't say "he doesn't want to be the black president that legalizes weed"--he's already the black president that reduced sentencing for crack, ha. And yes, yes, I know, Romney's is worse. Don't confuse for a second that I hate Romney far more.
Defense spending/foreign policy: It's 2012. Doesn't bombing/killing people and destroying cities seem like an ineffective way to enact political change? Why don't we just leave the middle east the fuck alone and start trying to have peaceful relations with these countries. That'd do more to fix terrorism than anything these trillions we've spent on war and national security has. I want a president that sees the world a bit more...maturely. Think how far we could go as a country and how fast we could fix our economy by spending trillions advancing us instead of killing people.
At the end of the day, Obama and his administration are deeply tied with large companies, and are far from transparent about it. See [this great chart]( I'm not okay with that.
I could probably write 3 pages on this shit, but honestly? Any one of those reasons are enough to make me completely fucking hate the guy. If I were in a swing state, I'd consider voting for him for the "lesser of two evils" principal, but since my state is guaranteed to vote Obama, I'll be voting third-party. I did vote for him in 2008, and completely lost faith about the time he renewed PATRIOT. |
The implications of your statement are truly depressing. You are fucking right, they got him. They. The same bastards that committed the dirty deeds, succeed in taking him, and putting him a hole in broad daylight with all eyes on him, in America. He does the right thing and this is how we, as a country, repay him for his risk. It's not like he didn't expect to feel the full force of military wrath come pounding down on his head. He was just knew that what he saw was wrong, and needed to be exposed to the American people because it was being done in their names and with their money. The most fucked up thing about the military law/civilian law issue is that Bradley Manning will, at least, go to prison for the rest of his life, and the guys who committed the dirty deeds will get commendations, and fat pensions when they retire.
Oh shit, I forget this post was about Anonymous!
Time to get a another vandalism charge! Whooppeeee! |
Did anyone watch the video that was advertised in the link to the venn diagram page. I would really appreciate some input on that. The video is here. This guy basically predicts the financial collapse of the US gov. He then advises investing in gold and silver. He then tries to sell you some more videos of advice.
I just want some more input. |
It's not a question of just the ability to use a multi-core chip, it's about how the specific work being done can cleanly be divided into discrete tasks (referred to as threads).
Some tasks are very simple to divide. Think of rendering 3D graphics, for instance. When you're rendering frame, you're applying the same set of calculations to thousands->millions of points in a scene. That means you can make a GPU with thousands of cores and just assign different regions of the frame to different cores. Boom, you go from 1 core to 3000+ cores and gain a fairly equivalent amout of performance.
In computing, these tasks that can scale in performance as you add cores is called "embarrassingly parallel codes."
On the other end are "serial codes" that are very difficult to split into discrete tasks. These tend to be difficult due to the reliance of one task on another. While there are still ways to split some parts of the task up, one part relies on the output of another. For example, consider encoding a video. Sure, you can chop up the video into multiple parts and perform the same encoding to all those chunks, but you need to join the video back together. There are more extreme examples, but I'm drawing a blank and this post has gone on long enough. |
Windows was just a UI design. Most of the actual OS is different. That's why you have Windows software and Mac software.
Smartphones are in the same boat. Android has some similar UI, but the underlying OS is different. Go download an android program (they have a .apk extension) and try to install it on your iPhone. It's not gonna work. The majority of the program relies on OS commands, which are too different. |
This will probably get buried but...
It seems like a move a corporation does when it's floundering and scraping for money.
Not because the iPhone isn't a great phone, not because slide/move to unlock is absolutely the deciding factor when people choose a phone. But for the first time, others (i.e. Samsung) are making a run for having the "best" smart phone. For several years, the iPhone was usually considered the best of the best, and most people couldn't come up with a good argument as to why they weren't.
Now, there is some parity to the smart phone market. Apple has its new iPhone 5 (which is way cool, btw) but the Samsung S3 is awesome too. Nokia is coming out with the Lumia 920, which is a windows phone that also expects to compete. There's no longer an absolute "iPhone is best" opinion.
So what does this mean? Why is Apple resorting to patent warfare?
It's not because iPhones aren't selling; they're flying off the shelves. But the sales numbers for Galaxy S3 are very high, and Google has done a good job of making Android a comparable product to iOS. The difference used to be obvious, now it's more of a matter of preference and/or familiarity.
The reason they're resorting to such silly lawsuits is because of the predictions of wall street analysts. Analysts (many of which don't know a lick about smartphones) expect a certain level of sales and profits for Apple. The current market isn't producing the incredible sales that iPhone saw in previous generations relative to competitors, because others are producing devices that perform similarly. Apple is still making money hand over fist, but investors always want more, more, more. Trying to eliminate the competition, or just grabbing an extra billion dollars helps satisfy that investor greed.
So really Apple is hitting a point of not having an advantage in features and tech specs. It doesn't make iPhones any worse than Android counterparts, but it makes investors unhappy because profits aren't going crazy. |
Tablets up until this point have been like ordinary consumer electronics. As they gain power and features and battery life and connectivity they will become more analogous to general computation devices in the same way the desktop is. This will be especially true as time passes because there will be lots of people out there with older and older tablets that they still want to get use out of without being forced to upgrade to new hardware or software for pricing reasons.
The flexible ecosystem won't have more consumers in the end because they'll go the geek route and choose it for high brow technological reasons, it will become more popular because they'll want something cheap, available, easily supported, and that doesn't require as much financial obligation to maintain, like every bargain basement PC that is in the hands of people who want a computer and don't see any reason to pay Apple premiums today.
Insofar as whether or not Apple was mismanaged, that's much less of a factor for what happened to their overall computer market share than the fact that Microsoft focused on legacy support and compatibility rather than tightly integrating a small group of hardware and software products. Whether the GUI was better or worse than Microsoft's was much less important than the fact that Microsoft was making an effort to support more third party vendors and businesses that needed to use their computers in enterprise environments.
Also, I made no mention about the IP court cases because while that does stifle innovation as a whole, it isn't what's going to hurt Apple in the end. The real problem has always been that what's most profitable (and I'd agree that Apple is intensely profitable) is not as useful to a large percentage of users over a long period of time.
Now there's no reason why Apple has to continue doing what it has been doing, and if they change strategies then it's anyone's guess what the future holds, but if they continue trying to make their business model for the last decade work, they're going to be left in the dust when the stylistic fad of owning Apple products is over, and people start evaluating what they want out of their computing devices in terms of raw power and flexibility and long term support relative to pricing, which has always been an area of dominance for Microsoft in the Desktop and PC market, and is quickly becoming the same for Android products. |
Sadly this will get buried for the late response but this reminded me of an awesome story from my youth. I used to work for a spam company in 2003-2004. We were one of the largest at the time and business was ok. Our major issue was about 15 or so anti-spammers that thought we were the anti-christ. They would opt into our campaigns just to receive our junk mail and bitch about it like it was fucking up their lives. We actually honored opt-out 100% and blacklisted people from further lists that we purchased. We basically had two racks of servers that pumped out spam at an alarming rate. We'd spend a couple of weeks setting one up at a colo and switch over just as the other one was shut down. It was a huge part of my job. One day the owner decides he's had enough and hussles up two /16's(about 131,000 IP addresses). We're starting a goddamn ISP. He tells me I need to learn about bgp, ARIN, virtual interfaces, the radb, and pretending to be many people on the phone. Several cisco and enterasys purchases later, we sent up a transit-AS between two huge ISP's in an unamed building in california. We were actually the fastest route by far between the two even though they were on the same floor. Anywho(more of this is a story for an IT forum), the anti-spammers find out about us. Our plan was to lease class C's to ourselves and ignore all of the anti-spammers as they complained to us about our evil spammer customers. It might have been me being the technical point of contact on too many things, who knows. They hijacked our radb account, broadcast our routes all over china and bangladesh, and make our network inaccessible from the outside. It sounds awful but the effect was this: Spam flowed like the damn had burst, we stopped receiving all hack attempts and DoS attacks, complaints to companies that peered with us went to the wrong foreign folks, and my job was much much easier the last 6 months I was there. I wish I could thank those fine misguided hackers. |
Most drug dealers do not know where to get any other drugs, at least not all the time. Even if they do they normally don't want to bother. And GHB is pretty uncommon nowadays
I'm willing to bet that most people drugging drinks are putting either roofies or other extremely common benzodiazepines like klonopin, xanax, or to a lesser extent, ativan and valium. These drugs are readily available and some of them don't taste that bad, though others definetly do. I wouldn't be surprised if people used hypnotics like ambien as well. |
It really is embarrassing and shameful. The mind of a rape victim is constantly screaming with self-doubt, disgust (at themselves mostly), fear, hurt and rage. The night is constantly played over and over again in the mind's eye, picking apart every single action and thought infinitely. Life is never the same afterwards.
I never reported it either for the same issues. I lived in a small town; everyone would have known within hours and getting those looks of accusation, like I just made it all up... I got that speech from a family member and I never want to hear it again. I understand that there are some who lie to ruin lives, but the vast majority of us don't.
There is also "crying rape is an excuse to act irresponsibly." How is this believable to the degree I have seen? I have heard of very few (possibly as little as one, no cases spring to mind) in my life where that was true. Yet still victims are made to feel like they are at fault for being attacked.
"You were raped? Dress more modestly. Don't drink at parties and they won't roofie you! Stop acting suggestively." What the actual fuck? So because I was attacked while walking home from school, I suppose it was my fault. I shouldn't have dressed so provocatively. Dem jeans and hoodies, man... |
1)Not specifically, but I knew a guy who would regularly use GHB himself - not on others but for personal use (according to him)
2)GHB is relatively easy to make with materials found at home (according to that video) I am sure it is easy enough to search the internet for recipes if you are really that dead set on finding it.
Any drug dealer that deals more than just weeds probably has connections to get almost any drug, really all they have to do is go to their hook up, if they don't have it then they go theirs and go up the chain.
Not to mention there is silk road and such. |
The real cost is that people who would have bought your product pirate it instead.
Then they would have bought it.
I love your analogy, because you give me 'unlimited seats'. I say, screw it, incentivize the crap out of the paid line (you want seats in the "center" coloumns? pay $), a la carte the incentives so that they spend more than they think the value of the whole is worth (maybe a "complete" experience is only worth $15 to them, figure out how you can get a customer to consistently pay something they think is only worth 70~90% of the listed price, or figure out what they are willing to truly overpay for and mark up a bunch for it), then open free seat only rooms, partials, and then paying-customer only rooms. This way, the customer is paying for a higher quality experience and the status. Free lines bring in more customers. Additionally, you can penalize the free lines, such as much longer pre-movie adverts, in-movie adverts, no seating, or a search for food and drink with a fee to avoid it. the |
I've never hear a convincing argument from the piracy side.
What argument does there need to be?
As long as there is no convincing argument from those demanding people to change their behaviour... why would people need to explain why they aren't changing their behaviour?
A: "Stop playing tennis!"
B: "Why should I stop playing tennis?"
A: "Because I say so!"
B: "No."
A: "Fuck you, you are an ignorant douchebag, I demand you to give me an excuse for playing tennis!"
B: "Why would I need an excuse?"
A: "BECAUSE I DON'T LIKE YOU PLAYING TENNIS!"
B: "And how is that a reason for me to stop doing what I enjoy?"
A: "FUCK YOU, IT'S THE LAW, I'M CALLING THE COPS!"
Does person A come accross as a reasonable guy to you?
>I'll lay out my argument why I think that piracy is wrong
Okay, first of all: I disagree with your argument. I will explain that thoroughly further down, however, here is the ridiculous part that you absolutely need to understand:
> if you could lay out the "Why it is okay" argument that you find so convincing
For me to do that you would need to undeniably prove that there is something wrong with piracy. Which you haven't. By asking me to "prove" that there's nothing wrong with piracy you are asking me to provide you with an "argument" I couldn't possibly make. It's like asking me to prove that I'm not a witch. Well, I'm not a witch because I'm not a witch. You need to tell me in what way I'm a witch before I can tell you why you are wrong. Is that understood or are there difficulties comprehending that concept?
>1) Someone creates content, they have a right to decide who gets to see or reproduce their content. Call this copyright.
What kind of content? Why do they have that right? Why don't others have that right?
>2) Content creators get to profit from their content by using their copyright to make money. This is in the form of, you can see my stuff (or show it to other people) if you pay me for it.
How is that the only way to make money? How does that way of making money make sense? Why can't they possibly make use other forms of compensation? Why can they censor people from seeing their content?
>3) The profit from (2) is what keeps creators making good stuff. It drives them to bring their talent and money to the difficult task of creating content that I'd like to see.
First of all: That's demonstrably false. People make stuff they love as long as they have the means to lead a comfortable life and are given the means to create new stuff. Where that comes from is rather irrelevant.
Secondly: You haven't demonstrated how the way to make profit you highlighted in (2) is the only way to ever make money.
>4) Piracy is when people reproduce or share your content in violation of your copyright. This mitigates the effect of (3). This is a bad thing caused by piracy.
No, it doesn't. It in no way follows.
First of all: (3) already a statement that begs the question on several levels.
Secondly: You haven't demonstrated how it's caused by piracy. You simply demonstrated that there need to be forms of compensation for people who do constructive work in a society (which can obviously happen despite piracy).
>5) Piracy is violating copyright held by other people. This is a bad thing caused by piracy.
How is violating copyright always a bad thing?
>Piracy is easy, convenient and free - but that doesn't make it right.
It doesn't make it wrong, either.
>I look forward to reading about why you think it is so obviously okay.
Because there is nothing wrong with it and you haven't demonstrated anything wrong with it, either. You only pleaded for content creators to be compensated fairly. Which is a position I COMPLETELY SUPPORT. I actually commend you for your support of content creators. However, that's not an argument against piracy. Content creators can be compensated fairly regardless whether or not piracy is illegal.
If you are interested in the topic then I suggest you read into ways of compensating people despite piracy, there are many alternatives to choose from and I bet many people would be happy for you to come up with an even better alternative. |
It will affect content generation, however that effect is not necessarily a negative one, at least in terms of long term implications. I personally believe that the consumer base has out passed the content distributors and in the next decade or so we will be seeing more shifts in the way content is sold and delivered. This is partially a result of the huge online access to content and piracy. While piracy may not be morally good in some ways it is culturally progressive. |
It's not the"end". Just the slow death and shedding of the masses. In which only "older generation" will still use it. Versus the people not "stuck" in their ways, that can adapt to a changing environment, which is the internet and culture.
For a few other trends that went that way look at: the dot com boom, Friendster, Myspace, Digg, and 4chan. Re-branding will not save it. Or the "hype" is now over (It's been over for years) or finally "everyone" (even the older generations) sees it. Or is it maybe young people are tired of using the site because they want their own niche "place" on the internet; where their parents and family are not "watching" them.
It's kind of like that question: What did you do on the internet before __ (reddit, facebook, etc). Most don't truly remember, or never used the other sites like it, or were five years old at the time. |
netflix is a great step in the right direction, but i will take years for hollywood to come around to the fact that people want real options.
why cant i stream a movie the same day it comes out on dvd, not rent it, not buy it for $20 but simply watch it and not worry about it either getting locked in the future like many on demand services or, waiting forever to be released on a streaming service like netflix. |
I cannot stress this enough. I've said it once I'll say it again. If netflix or a similar service had everything available i wanted to watch, tv, movies, old show no longer on the air, in theater movies.. I'd drop a good amount of cash on that per year. but no, they wont come to their sense and they'd rather try to nickle and dime me. They get almost none of my money. I'd honestly rather watch iron man 3 at home in full hd glory. even with a year sub to all content I'd still be willing to pay the ticket price for the movie as a "pay per view" just to watch ironman 3 at home with my own couch, pause so i can go take a dump half way through the movie because I ate a whole fucking pizza the first 13 mins of the movie. hell, include the opening trailer for fuck sake, just make it available on my time. this is 2013 already, we're not using film reels any more. directly distribute that shit to my house.
side note, some one mentioned steam as prime example of available content lowering piracy and I agree 100%. As a matter of fact, I'd go so far as to say that I'd be willing to pay for a modified pay to play feature.
picture this. new game comes out but like all new pc games, they dont have a demo (serious where the hell did demos go?) steam offers a 1 - 3 hour trial (times depending on length, difficulity, and type of game, money willing to put down). you put down.. say 3 to 5$ to play a single player game for one to 5 hour.. or mayne a dollar per hour up to 5 hours (again depending on the game). Seeing as game dont have trial any more, I see this as an awesome way to 1) get the customer invested and interested in the game 2) help spread the word of the game. Maybe I didnt like it but Its a game my friend would totally be into and I only spend 3 dollars to decide wether or not I wanted it.
if you're anything like me, you'd rather pirate a game and try it, if you like it buy it later, no not spend any money on it at all and walk away because its not interesting enough. Lets take bioshock infinite for example. I pirated it because I was never really much into the first or second game, first was good but didnt suck me in like a few of my favorite past games, second was meh. third, fucking loved it! easily one of my new favorite games and despite me having played all the way through I am going to buy it (when I have the cash) because I want that in my collection. Had steam offered a cheap easy 1-3 hour trial of it, I probably would have hit that trial timer and dropped the cash right there. Now you could say "well if you liked the pirated copy so much you should have stopped and bought it." lets be realistic, who the fuck actually does that? I dont feel all the morally conflicted about it, at the end of the day every one in that dev team goes home making more money than I and I will be purchasing it one day so step off your high horse and get over it. Offer a trial, the free to play weekend for multiplayer games is a FLAWLESS example, i've dropped cash on games I've only played once because the free weekend trial convinced me to (and usually at an awesome price) |
Original content on Netflix is paid for by user subscription fees (which is around $3.1 billion a year), that's shows like House of Cards, Lillehammer and so on.
Everything else is contracted out like syndication of a show to another network. Netflix agrees to pay a certain amount to the rights holder for every episode and movie they use and get unlimited viewership of that episode.
Those contracts and all operating costs are paid for by the subscription fees which is why netflix is able to afford these things without resorting to advertising revenue. |
SO what I'm getting from this post (as in, all the comments I'm reading) is that i can pay 2-3 or maybe more companies and have to sign in to this or that blah blah blah or i can just go onto the web and casually watch/download anything and everything, as long as i don't mind a bit of grain.
I don't like to pirate stuff but if its a difference between pirating and not watching i will need to pirate, sorry multi-million/billion dollar industry's :(.
Why not make everything available through any pay per veiw service and then the service with the best extra's and pricing and shit can get my loyalty. That way the customer wins not the middle man!
I mean sure netflix is worth it if i have kids and several people using it, so as to benefit from the range of stuff (i like what 20% of the content) Or i have spare cash to spend on entertainment (a lot of people don't you know). same goes for other services. Seems like a good deal untill you realise its costing you nearly £100 a year AND you still might need a subscription service to get basic TV - plus internet costs. (plus we have £150 Tax for using a TV). |
I actually do this. No problems so far. Did it with a vpn as well.
I don't think they should care, for all intents and purposes they're serving to an allegedly US browser.
It is I, the user, who is at fault here. While I do understand the restrictions of international licensing, it is just a load of crap. I used to download torrents whenever I felt like watching a movie, but the waiting bit was a deal-breaker. I just want to pop open a movie and just watch it when I feel like it. And netflix does just that.
I mean, I went out of my by hiring a vpn just to watch netflix before I discovered mediahint. At $20 combined, it was still far more cheaper than going to the theater here twice a month. |
Just buy the DVD then. If you can't afford it, go without. I don't care, I'm rich either way. |
Told by whom? A marketing guy who is really good at schmoozing at hip bars and making connections? Or someone with an extensive knowledge of UI design principles and human learning? The marketing folks I've met almost all fall into the former bucket.
This myth that somehow engineers who spend their entire lives thinking deeply about computers and software interfaces are automatically less knowledgeable about interfaces than communications majors is laughable and awfully convenient for people without technical skills. It also rarely involves any sort of metrics or facts to demonstrate why marketing's UI input has actually been valuable.
"I'm really important to the team, because these geeks don't know how laymen think! That's why I should make more than them and I will know when they need to be told when to say when! I mean, I was a successful real estate agent before this! I'm a sales genius!"
This "expert on laymen" myth is what leads to a valuable and necessary, but adjunct part of the software development process instead becoming the source of authority in the process. Some engineers don't know much about UI. Some marketing folks don't know much about UI. Being assertive and an extrovert doesn't make you have some automatic insight into the mind of the common man.
The other thing I think people forget is that tons of your early adopters are going to be engineers. That's the people who adopt new software, embrace new software concepts and proselytize new software to others. Let me think of an example...oh, hey, how about Reddit? I'm sure a marketing guru would have totally poo poohed this interface.
Or, hey, how about the entire internet which was massively successful way before "marketing" was here to tell engineers when to say when? |
UI design principles and human learning?
Show me these guys as I've seen no average engineer be able to pull off a UI. Hell even UI specialists just make google/apple clones
> A marketing guy who is really good at schmoozing at hip bars and making connections?
These would be the sales guys not the marketing analysts.
> less knowledgeable about interfaces than communications majors is laughable
If I could only give you the logins for the engineer free reign mess I am dealing with now with one client. Do you honestly think marketers and sales have nothing to add to development? That is completely amazing because it flies in the face of Apple (which is 80% marketing and 20% development), every car manufacturer ever, and a whole slew of products. You want to see an engineer over design check out some of the interfaces for turn of the century sat/nav in cars. It's horrendous.
> Being assertive and an extrovert doesn't make you have some automatic insight into the mind of the common man.
you are falling into stereotypes. If you anaylize user data you get a clear pictures of what works and what doesn't work.
>The other thing I think people forget is that tons of your early adopters are going to be engineers.
not if you are building a consumer facing interface and no I would never use a platform that required a full fledge developer to handle the day to day.
> I'm sure a marketing guru would have totally poo poohed this interface.
no because it is super basic and easy to understand. The exact opposite of what an engineer would make.
> |
Well to consider the true loss of money you need to factor in that that 12-mo U.S. bonds were at 0.147% last May.
That means you're also looking at an additional loss of $0.0559, meaning that it's about 20 cents lost per share, not 15.
This is under the assumption that you would've invested in the lowest risk investment instead, but if you were going to invest the money in any other Nasdaq company, then you would have seen an average 29% market growth ([source]( |
I had an ad blocker for a little while, but no longer use them. I don't have too much of a problem with pop-up and ads at all. In fact, I can't think of the last time I had to close a popup on a non-NSFW page.
As I see it, I'm getting all this content for free (especially on Youtube). The least I can do is let ads role to support those bringing me the content especially when I can just tune it out or look at something else while it's rilling. Compared to TV which has 10 minutes of unskippable ads per 30 minutes of content, 30 second and banner ads are a small price to pay.
If people run around using ad blocker all the time, marketing companies will start to seek more invasive solutions to the problem which may make things worse than it is. Measures to control people who are going against what is expected tends to hurt general users more than the malicious ones (see DRM) which I'd rather just avoid if possible.
There are some sites where they have ads everywhere, or put two words on a page and make you load a new one to keep reading, but I typically just leave the page if they're doing that stuff. I can always find the information elsewhere. |
I think I understand it pretty well. advertisers absolutely are parasites, they fit the definition perfectly. they require a host to live, and they diminish the host somehow - that's what it means to be a parasite. there are varying degrees of parasitism, some bordering on or overlapping mutualism. for example, fig wasps. they parasitize a fig, and hurt the fig, but the fig requires them for pollination. if you disagree with this you should probably look up what the term means.
i consume free content because other people make it and provide it to me for free. for example, all of the content i consume on reddit is user generated. i don't read the articles, i mainly come here to argue with people. did you really write your post expecting to be somehow compensated for it? and content is free to exist independent of funding. people make movies, games, and websites without expecting anything in return, because it's fun for them. it's a hobby. that stuff will always exist as long as there are people. the real problem on the internet is hosting, which i pointed out in my previous comment. it's all about hosting, and figuring out how to make hosting on the internet more accessible to people. it'll happen. i think a really cool model would be that if you really enjoy a web site and you have your own internet connection at home, you can co-host the website, in a manner analogous to the way people seed torrents. that's just an idea i had, i don't really know much about distributed computing.
also i couldn't possibly give less of a fuck if current news outlets die a slow and painful death as advertising revenue is stripped away from them. a news model where everyday people record shit on their cameraphones and put it on the internet is way better than getting news from forbes or fox news or who the fuck ever. discussing the news on websites and forums is more informative than reading some asshole's opinion piece could ever be. |
Although electric cars are not entry-level cars yet the model 2 is very competitive in its price range(0-60 mph in 4.4 fucking seconds), nearly everywhere electricity is factors cheaper than gas, and many workplaces are starting offer free charging stations that will only expand with electric car adoption. |
If the solution of the jobs problem is "stop technological innovation", I think you can see how backwards this philosophy is. Not only that, but even if one company refuses to replace labor with technology, there will inevitably arise another one willing to do it, driving everyone out of business.
In an overcompeteteive financial system, the only way to survive is to minimize expenditures more than your competitors. If surviving is evil, then let he who is without sin cast the first stone. |
Yeah, it's a so called "case film". Meaning, it's an highly optimized (and often idealized) representation of an advertising idea. (Which undoubtedly can be very clever and funny). These films don't exist to sell products but are used by agencies to sell their idea to juries at important advertising award shows. The jury often has to watch hundreds of entries in a very short time, that's why the films are optimized for clarity and brevity (ideally <30s). Winning award nets the agency creative points, leading to a yearly “creative ranking”. The higher an agency ranks, the more likely it is for brands to pay the agency and tap into it’s creative power.
Now, it's quite possible, that at some point at some place such a vending machine existed, but mainly for the purpose of making the case film. It's even likely, that the machine was put up in the agency building. And the people you see handling the advertised product are agency employees. Officially a case film is only allowed to be entered into awards, if the portrayed idea has actually been implemented in real life. But agencies obviously know how to tweak the truth and will often stage such an implementation. For example, a TV ad might just run once in the early morning (low rates!) at some obscure TV channel to be eligible for award entry. Or some website will be online for a couple weeks and still contain a ton of bugs and not work properly on half the browsers, but if you take the right screenshots, all is fine. And if said website ignites “tons of buzz” and “spreads like wildfire through all relevant social media channels”, then often some no-name blogger will have been paid for talking about the site.
The problem is, that entering a case film in to an award show can cost hundreds if not thousands of dollars a piece. So the agencies want to know their money well spent. Therefore the tendency for taking creative freedoms when documenting their idea. |
Swimmer here. Been swimming for well over 20 years competitively. I swim ten miles a week and I have tried just about every device that has been made over the years for listening to music underwater while training.
Underwater earbuds never work and always hinder your workout with the frustrations they cause. Trying to keep water sealed out of your ears is with earbuds while you swim is almost impossible. Especially if you are even a moderately fast swimmer.
So many companies have made awesome waterproof mp3players over the years, and then rendered them useless for actual training by using earbuds as the delivery method.
The only ones that have ever gotten it right are the ones that use bone conduction. And there have only ever been two of them.
One was a snorkel that transmitted sound to your inner ear through your jaw when you bit down on the mouthpiece. It was only a radio though and was made in the 90's and sold in sharper image or something.
The the other bone conduction device is the SwiMP3 by finis. I have owned every iteration of the SwiMp3 over the years, and most of them sucked, but at least you could hear the music when the batteries weren't dying and the firmware wasn't corrupted.
The latest iteration is called the SwimP3 Neptune and it is absolutely amazing. It's everything I wanted the last four versions to be. |
Often people try to equate how smart computers are compared to something biological. This is good public relations, but it is deceptive. A dog is not brilliant at chess nor can it search the entire internet under half a second and come up with interesting results (often porn, sure, whatever - you get my point). |
Binary blobs are a great solution - provided they are decrypted locally, and not server side. If they are decrypted server side then, there is the potential to intercept the password while it is being sent. If it's decrypted on the user end, then the same problem applies to bandwidth useage as using pgp or a truecrypt volume to store files; which is to say any change to the file will result in needing to upload almost all of the data for the file again - Edit, most of the data should remain the same. Only the parts of the container that are changed would be uploaded. Less data change occurs then I had originally believed would based on what I had read.(except the name, maybe).
>This model is probably not legal in the USA.
Which brings us back to, it's best to presume that the server you are storing your files on can look at them without oversight and without informing you of the search - and pre-encrypt all your files regardless of the claims made by the servers owners.
And this brings us back to the tool problem you brought up - and I definitely forgot about the lack of tools on mobile. Tools need to be Usable, Effective and Efficient - some of them are (ex. truecrypt), others are more clunky (ex. pgp), and the learning curve can be difficult to wrap your head around (again, pgp is a good example).
So what to do about this. One, inform people of why the attitude of "I have nothing to hide, so why should I care?" is about as asinine as you can get. The next up, would be to start to encourage the people around you to voice their opinion to government. Email, phone and most importantly of all - letters to the editor. If you have a well followed blog, use this as a platform to start a discussion about privacy and the need for these tools.
If we can grow the communities understanding of security, we can create a demand for tools and financial support required to develop them. And education is the start to all of this - I've been slowly encouraging people to think of it around me, and it's slow - it feels utterly hopeless sometimes. But once in awhile someone comments on "Hey, thanks for pestering me to back those files up" - after complaining of computer problems. It may take awhile, but if we (we as in those who care about security and privacy) push, pull and educate - we can make an impact to make things easier. To have laws that support privacy, instead of erode it. To have tools that are easy and inclusive to security instead of exclusive do to technical knowledge requirements. |
true that. Automation should been seen as a boon to an industry, not a guillotine.
There's two ways to look at it:
You have a newspaper that employs 25 reporters. A quarter of these are the indepth stories and whatnot, the rest are beat reporters and fact checkers.
You now have software that does the job of the 75% without error, instantaneously and at a consistent deliverable quality.
THe first impulse of most businesses is to lay off the 75%, because then you have slashed costs on your current income for the same quality.
But-and this is the model noone seems to take up on-you could also replace the 75% of rote reporting by expanding the 25% actual reporters to 100% of your reporting staff. Rather than take a budgetary cut, you maintain current expenses, the costs of automation subsidized now by the increased focus on quality journalism.
This increased quality pushes you upmarket, and the overall industry benefits without people fearing to invest in your trade on uncertain layoff grounds.
That companies are in such a rush to maximize immediate profits at the loss of long term infrastructure and phenomenally greater industry standing and sales just bewilders me. |
Rant
This is tantamount to outsourcing your job to some guy in china for a 1/3 of your pay while you do nothing, people get pretty pissed about that, Same difference, getting something to do your job for you while you masturbate. Why pay you when we can pay someone or something nothing or less. Capitalism 101, but an enlightened mature individual would see that you need to share resource to have a society, capitalism is just the way we try to share and develop these resources. Mostly in shitty greedy human way. |
Exactly. From the article: "The Los Angeles Times was the first newspaper to publish a story about an earthquake on Monday - thanks to a robot writer"
Also: "The LA Times is a pioneer in the technology which draws on trusted sources - such as the US Geological Survey - and places data into a pre-written template."
The article even states about the use of robots in sports: "Other news organisations have experimented with algorithm-based reporting methods in other areas, particularly sports." |
Is there competition between Verizon and AT&T? They charge the same prices or almost the same, for the same sort of packages, and similar coverage. There's no competition there. Even Sprint is sucking at competing. Tmobile is the only one bringing any competition to the game, and if Sprint buys them, that's it, it's game over. You can say goodbye to cheap tmobile prepaid or any of the mvno's on tmobile or sprint, they will have more spectrum that at&t or verizon and as many or more customers out the gate. As a result they will be able to offer an even better product in the long run, but will charge out the ass for it, because they have no reason not to. Verizon and AT&T only started having some cheaper prepaid and mvno's on them because of Tmobile and Sprint offering the same. |
It most definitely makes the carrier more money in most situations.
Let's say you have 2 Lines with 3 GB of data.
That's $40 per line, plus the data charge of $60, netting $140 per month.
Same situation, now with "edge". Your cost of $40 per line just went down to $30(taking your cost from $140 to $120... Sounds great, right?). How about that shiny Galaxy S5 you could have had for $100 at bestbuy? Well, now you have $50 in taxes for it up front, but you also pay $30 dollars a month for the damn thing. This drives your monthly cost up from $140(2 yr) to $180(edge).
It's unfortunate because the carriers are billing this as a way to save the consumer money, but it's the exact opposite in the majority of situations. Rarely, though it does happen, does this save a customer money. Eventually, the carriers are going to raise the upgrade/activation fees so high on the standard 2 year contract plan that you're going to be forced into these types of plans anyway, and it's bullshit. |
Comcast CEO would be the devil regardless. People all have the things that are important to them, and will use whatever means are as available to "win."
In /r/technology they dislike Verizon/Comcast more than they dislike the word "rape." This seems obvious from context... If you take this to tumblr you will find the opposite reaction that you seem to want. |
It works great. The two aforementioned tablets are running exactly the same OS my desktop runs, no problems at all.
Speed-wise, it's faster than you'd think. The Surface has a Core-i5 processor (mobile version, but rather poky nonetheless) and the Encore is using one of Intel's Bay Trail processors - which is significantly less shitty than their Atom processors of old. In fact, it uses the same HD4000 graphics designs employed in many of their desktop processors (albeit not quite so many cores) and so does the Surface, so they're surprisingly powerful. You could fire up Steam and have a laugh, if you wanted. I've had Crysis running on the Surface, and it was playable, if not exactly the kind of butter-smooth experience I'd expect with my desktop! I'd expect things like Bioshock would run well enough as well. I would anticipate the Encore wouldn't struggle too much with a game like Half Life 2, by comparison - in fact, here's Portal 2 . Bear in mind the Encore is under £200 (UK here). It's crazy what that buys you now.
I believe the Surface uses an SSD of sorts while the Encore is more of an eMMC chip design. Both are generally faster than a normal hard drive based system when it comes to loading apps, with the exception of circumstances where high throughput (MB/s) is required, in which case the Encore can drop behind a little, as eMMC is responsive, but not very high bandwidth.
That said, I've had both tablets running Photoshop and Illustrator. I can do practical work with them on the Surface and it's stylus, and it runs well, but on the tiny Encore it was more for interest. The limiting factor for simple tasks, even then, would not be the Encore's hardware as far as performance is concerned, but rather the RAM, as it only has 2GB, which will be swallowed very quickly by such applications. |
I don't think it's exactly like that. The case that everyone looks at is the Otis elevator company losing it's trademark on the word "Escalator". But one of the reasons they lost it is because Otis themselves advertised that they offered "the latest in elevator and escalator design". This showed that Otis themselves were using escalator as a generic term.
I think the courts recognize that companies can't really control how people use words and so they won't penalize a company for making their product so popular people think of their brand whenever they think of that product type. But when the company itself starts using the word in a generic way then they lose it. I'm sure Apple has their lawyers check over every statement they make to the public to make sure that someone doesn't screw up and say "check out our new iPad" instead of saying "check out the new iPad". They may even go over it in employee training about how to refer to their products too. |
Micro$ucks should go back to what they used to do best. MS Office (Sans Outlook which Sucks!!!) and their bloated DRM licensing. |
I think there's an interesting discussion from this: could someone who makes a living with the look of their body (like Kelly) have a copyright on that? Therefore, making the distribution of naked photos a crime of copyright infringement? |
It is possible.
However, that is the same line of thinking that got us here. These people, politicians, are the deadliest of sneaks. The kind that steals your life and money without you even realizing it.
I'd rather assume they are actively trying to screw everyone, then I am at least not surprised when they inevitably do something wrong and get a little wrist tap instead of going to jail for the rest of their lives, as would be the fate of anyone whom was not involved in money and politics. |
If something isn't transmitted over the open internet doesn't mean it doesn't interact with it. Take the example of car transmitting data. They're, like you said, not going to browse to a server and fill their data into a formula on this website, in fact they probably won't communicate with a server at all but use hive technology as their total traffic exceeds the handling capacity of reasonably affordable servers. They will however use the same technology to communicate with each other. This is, to simplify, namely wlan. And they are going to transmit on the same frequency as say your cellphone wlan antenna.
The reason for this is as following: First of for this kind of application you have only a certain bandwidth which you could use at all. The lower you go with your frequency the less data you can transmit. The higher you go the less range you have to transmit. This reduces the usable stretch to a really narrow gap. This gap is strongly competed by many different applications used in a city. Those usually buy (very expensive) licenses to broadcast on a certain frequency.
Now you will notice that you are allowed to use (and therefore broadcast) wlan freely with your router, cellphone and so on. This is due to this special frequency being designated to be used in this way. Now a car which would like to get it's own frequency would have to pay rent for it which would drive it's operating costs beyond reasonable levels. If you take the same frequency as wlan you circumvent this problem. Obviously you create the new problem of competing devices. This can be solved by what Merkel is suggesting.
Now why don't they make another band free to use for car manufacturers instead? The reasons for this are twofold afaik. First off this is hugely expensive, selling bandwidth is a real money grab. If the person booking it doesn't pay you loose out on quite a lot of it. It would also costs the industrie as they'd have to develop new broadcasting and specifications instead of the already available and perfectly usable equipment in the wlan area.
Secondly and most important there really aren't much frequencies which could be made free at all. This is due to a multiple of reasons. Let's take the channel which broadcasts satellite television as an not perfectly fitting and simplified example as it is relatively easy to understand. This is build on a purely static relation were satellites always send and your dish always receives. They absolutely do not care about any other entity on this channel. So if you were to send here the only thing that would happen is that your messages merge and both your communications partner and every tv within your broadcasting range won't be able to understand the messages meant for them. In this case the infrastructure already established on this channel won't be able to adapt to the new situation and plainly won't work. A second example as you mentioned would be the frequencies used by say emergency responders. While you could open them the damage done by a lack of communications here is probably greater than the damage done by a lack of communications by a few cars. So in the end you really don't have to much of a choice in terms of which band you use. |
This should be at the top.
One thing I will contest to, and unfortunately I can contest to this from experience, is that the FBI has and may *sometimes** follow-up on people who have made statements as you just did on the internet. Even with no prior provocations or history. I've noted "sometimes" because protocol might have changed throughout the course of years post-9/11.
How you may ask I know? |
Strictly speaking, the Supreme Court would be very likely to throw out some or all of FISA if a case were to reach them and they were not convinced to throw it out (moot point; it's next to impossible to prove that you have standing to challenge this law).
In that event, Section 302 of HR 4681 would prevent section 309 from continuing to allow the collection and transmission of this data. But that event is tremendously unlikely.
It's really not as much of an expansion as a SOPA/CISPA would be. It probably doesn't legalize anything that something else doesn't, but it's weaselly enough to make me suspicious. And yeah, having the AG define procedures may serve to normalize/legitimize it. The NSA's track record certainly implies that they'll take the most liberal (read: broad) interpretation they can.
The initial reaction was... misdirected, though not overly strong in magnitude. I am quite glad that it happened, though, because I hadn't thought about FISA in at least six months. That's what needs focus, and we've gotten distracted. |
EDIT: I'M A BUNDLE OF STICKS! Please downvote to oblivion.
Another edit: Maybe not that much of a bundle of sticks.
Section 302 of the same law states that no part of the bill is to be construed as authorizing any activities not otherwise authorized under other laws or the United States Constitution. So this isn't actually fucking us; it's just stating that we're already being fucked, and detailing precisely how we are to be fucked in the future. A different, already in place law allows for storage.
Strictly speaking, what is already allowed should rightfully be considered unconstitutional. [Previous challenges to the constitutionality of FISA have been dismissed without ruling by the Supreme Court]( so there's no "official" ruling on the constitutionality of the laws allowing the actions this law regulates; FISA, as it stands, makes those actions legal. Other parts of this law actually do impose slightly more strict rules than the internal guidelines.
That said. /u/Wazowski, do you know specifically which bills allow this? Clearly they've fallen out of the public eye.
** FISA to be responsible for. If you're a US citizen, [go here]( for some information on this and other foreign intelligence laws. If [your representative is on the committee]( get in touch with them about how shitty this law is.
--preserved to display my stupidity (maybe not completely stupid?) for future generations to admire--
>Acquisition, retention, and dissemination
Sounds like a lot more than archiving. Go ahead and read section 309. It's right there in the imgur mirror.
I'll wait.
There, you done? No, not exactly SOPA. Worse. Much worse. This allows any law enforcement agency to store any electronic communication indefinitely without a warrant. Legally. And for that information to go to any other part of the government at any time, again without warrant. Legally.
This is an absurdly egregious violation of the fourth amendment.
Subsection (b), paragraph 3, Subparagraph B, clause ii:
>the communication is reasonably believed to contain evidence of a crime, and is held by a law enforcement agency;
clause iii:
>the communication is enciphered or reasonably believed to have a secret meaning;
For those who don't care about their rights enough to spend five minutes reading, the |
I've witnessed this happen with several other social sites, a couple of my own country, MySpace, now Facebook. Even Twitter. The young people come first. They make it popular. They make it great, they post pictures, and often more sexy ones. That attracts other friends.
Then it gets popular, and the ''older'' people come. They want to join in on the party, or be friends with their family members, or see what their kids are up to. So it becomes from friend orientated to family oriented.
I got teachers on my Facebook. My parents. Aunts, Uncles. My girlfriends family. I can't say shit anymore. I can't post links anymore, because my humor can be a bit crude and won't sit well/give a bad image to a lot of people.
Of course you can just not give a fuck, but I'm not gonna post some offensive stuff so my girlfriends more modest family can see that stuff. Or some horribly offensive jokes I love so much. So I don't use it. People who post mostly now are hyper active girls/women who love to overshare, and the older family members with pictures of their family, and the people with babies. God, the babies. It never stops.
So yeah. I'm pretty done. I'd have to set up groups to be only specific to certain people but the issue is that I don't want to go through that trouble/effort. I don't want to put a very offensive joke on my timeline I enjoy and have a group 'offensive joke friendly people' to show it to.
Every time those social sites got flood with parents, the people move on to another. |
Hmmm...Concerning the song "C-Walk", Daz made the beat and produced it. It was released on Kurupt's CD "Kuruption! - West Coast Edition" in 1998 under Antra Records, which is a sub label of A&M Records. In late 1998 A&M's parent company, PolyGram, was bought by Universal Music Group. A&M transferred to Antra all of it's rights in the joint venture's agreements with Kurupt but retained exclusive ownership of all rights to recordings made prior to the termination. Long story short... Daz doesn't own the rights to the song. As far as I can tell, either PolyGram or Kurupt directly owns the rights. Perhaps Rockstar made an agreement with them for the song.
And "Nothing But the Cavi Hit" sung by Mack 10 and Tha Dogg Pound, (Originally from the Rhyme & Reason Soundtrack), was produced by Daz, but was released by Priority records which is also owned by Universal Music Group. Even as a single, it was released by Priority. |
The percentage of cases, yes even civil, that go to trial is astronomically low]( |
Yeah; god forbid they don't make more money somehow.
The networks take every chance they can get to get more money, not explicitly in the advertising contract? Fuck the advertiser, let's charge someone else for that space. Hulu is included in this fucked contact-ridden cross fulfillment scheme.
This year's Super Bowl stream was really the last straw for me. The advertisers only secured broadcast rights over certain mediums NBC felt that it was OK to sell half the ad space to Coke and the other half to TMobile. A football game which skipped every 2 seconds and the same crystal clear shitty TMobile commercial for 3 hours? Great.
The little secret Networks don't want anyone to know is they only get paid good money for first run shows and ads in prime time. Outside of this they see giant green fields of dollar signs in products like Hulu.
While networks and old money corporations steal people's money for what used to be free OTA and call it pay for convenience they are constantly spending money lobbying in congress to hold fast to the status quo. |
No, it's explicitly independent and governed by the BBC Trust. However, since it is granted authority by a Royal Charter, it's terms have to be renegotiated with the govt every few years. And since in attempting to be impartial it inevitably upsets the govt of the day at some point, it means that it comes under a great deal of pressure and (not so) veiled threats about cutting the license fee during every round if negotiation. Which ironically leads to accusations of bias for the govt of the day. Inevitably this charge comes from vested interests (daily mail, who own a stake in ITV, and the sun, which is owned by the same company as Sky) which are nevertheless very influential in shaping public discourse.
By way of an aside, the license fee doesn't go all to the BBC. Although they get the lions share, a proportion goes to other commercial terrestrial channels too as well as, ironically, Sky. |
I exist almost exclusively in the server space. LOTS of servers. I can't remember the last time I wrote a server spec that included spinning drives. The only use case we have for spinning platters is huge amounts of really slow disk space. Think online archiving. Even then if we take power and cooling into account the cost advantage is pretty low. |
that is a bad thing.
The evo has to read multiple times over because of voltage drift........
The problem gets worse when you increase densities because there are much less electrons holding the state of the cell.
> I suspect that the algorithm didn't take the change in cell voltage properly into account
This line is the main issue. cell voltage should change as little as possible. I do not think samsung could fix this. In fact, the change to v nand is proof that they cant fix it at all.
edit: |
Great - lets make them utilities...
How do they charge utilities? By use.
Now we pay per GB.
FUCK THAT.
Edit - I completely agree that internet use is different than water/gas/electric, and should be treated differently. Where I differ, is that I dont see the powers in charge making an informed decision on a pricing structure that would benefit the people. |
Electricity: We will not need the Government much longer for electricity. Elon Musk of Tesla is working with solar city to provide micro grids that are powdered by solar panels. This will soon replace any dependence on the government grid. Also solar in general is put pacing our need to rely on the grid.
The Government provided internet access? You mean that they run the back bone in which ISP's control the "Last Mile". Corporations like google, amazon and every other tech based company would happily take over running the internet back bone. This would help get the NSA out of the picture and increase ISP's connection to the backbone.
Water now that is a harder one. There are not too many private water companies. But I would love to see the privatization of the the water utility. I know the wonder material grapheen can quickly and easily desalinate water. This can be a great boon to Southern California that has been in a drought for a while. |
That's always been the case, Google perfectly emulates the ghosts' signature AI. The main idea is that all four ghosts have different AI so that they can trap you rather than just having all four be a few squares behind you.
Blinky does directly chase you, Pinky goes for the shortest route to a point determined by where you're moving (meaning he's often trying to cut you off), Inky heads for a point based on extending a line drawn from Blinky's location to the point two squares in front of you (he'll seem like the unpredictable one and tends to come out of nowhere as you're trying to flee from Blinky), and Clyde starts to chase you when he's far away but flees once he comes within eight tiles of you (to the untrained eye, he seems to just be moving randomly and is pretty much the harmless one who just doesn't want to be nearby when you eat a Power Pellet).
And then their pathfinding algorithms are not quite the shortest route: they're rather simplified for old hardware and they have two special rules: they may not make 180 turns (except when changing phases between their normal target chasing, scattering to their 'home corners', and fleeing once you eat a Power Pellet), and they make not make upward turns into the two 'safe zones'. As I just mentioned, at set intervals the player gets a moment to breathe as they scatter, switching between chasing you and returning to their designated corners of the maze - this happens less often and for a shorter duration of time in later levels until it amounts to nothing more than just a quick 180 at certain moments in time. And of course they no longer chase you once you eat a Power Pellet, they have to turn around and flee!
[Further specifics on every minute detail of how the game is coded are here.]( |
Hi, I found a problem in that your site doesn't ask for alternatives when choosing a route. Here's an example. Travelling from Haltwhistle in Northumberland, UK, to Brampton in Cumbria, UK. There is more than one Brampton and in this case it chose the wrong one. |
The setup was PS3 -> Receiver -> TV, and it used two very cheap ($2) HDMI cables.
This gave me quite noticable sparklies on the screen, which I first thought were a fault in the Receiver (never even heard of them up till that point). I tried several other devices that worked fine, it was only the PS3 that was giving me sparklies, and only when going through the receiver.
I tried several other cables and setups, and never fixed the problem per se - but the next day when I went to use the system, it all worked fine. |
Considering broadband internet is like a utility in many ways, this would make sense. Is the power company going to cap your use? No, they'll just charge you for what you use.
And while some might say that one could live without the internet, and thus the internet is not a utility, what about those who rely on the internet for their very livelihoods? Telecomuters, free lancers, not to mention the disabled who might not be able to get out of the house, but can work from a computer at home! |
Subsets and Splits
No saved queries yet
Save your SQL queries to embed, download, and access them later. Queries will appear here once saved.