Scott Betts wrote:
That is the main advantage for the developer. It is not the main advantage for the consumer.
Kirth Gersen wrote:
It took me a few episodes before I realized they weren't grad students.I think if they made them college freshmen initially, I would have much fewer problems with the show.
If Sony actually tried to do something with this language they would probably have a legal battle on their hands that they don't want to be resolved. It would probably not be in their favor.
Scott Betts wrote:
No, they aren't treating us as customers. They are treating us as thieves. If they were treating us as customers, they would show respect. These policies do not do that.
Scott Betts wrote:
I agree and think first sale doctrine is going to be reexamined. I just disagree with you on how it is going to end. I believe the general expectation people have is that they will be able to resell the products they have purchased, and that the reexamination will strengthen this idea. Most people think they are buying software not licensing it. I think it will go with the way most people think they are doing something.
Painful Bugger wrote:
Avtually, Scott's arguments are consistent with what he has posted in the past.
Scott Betts wrote:
No. First sale doctrine. You sold me the disk with information on it. Once you do that, I can do anything with the disk I want, barring reproduction, which is covered under copyright laws.
Licenses which viloate first sale doctrine and have not stood up in court. You cannot force someone into a contract after point of sale, which the licensing agreements do.
I find it amusing that you disagree with this point so strongly, since every person I know who buys video games actively uses this for justifcation for buying the game when they could easily pirate it. I mean, we have all known how to do it for the past 10+ years, but we still have bought hundreds of games. And this is literally the justification every single person I know uses as to why.
Trying to limit how I can use a product after I have legally purchased it is wrong. Resale is legal, and preventing me from doing it is wrong. Sharing it is legal, and preventing me from doing so is wrong.
Comrade Anklebiter wrote:
Like I said, there are so many different reports about what standard policy is and which ones apply that I can't form an opinion. It could be that different standards apply to differnt types of investigations, and people reporting don't know which ones are supposed to apply.
I wouldn't put it past the JD to be doing shady things (I expect it at this point). I just don't know enough about their policies to tell if they are in this case, and the people reporting are being inconsistent and biased enough that I can't tell if the JD actually did anything wrong here.
pres man wrote:
From what I have been able to find out, the AP found out about it after the Justice Department notified the AP. The JD's rules are that they must notify within 90 days, and that was the notification the AP recieved.
My biggest problem is that there is so much different and conflicting information going on I can't make an informed oppinion.
Comrade Anklebiter wrote:
Those 1000s of IPs were people who had viruses on their system that were performing the attacks without the people knowing about it. They are refered to as a botnet. The viruses look for signals from a host on where to attack. The 14 were found by tracking back the signals from the botnet to their sources.
Recently, a single person was arrested for the largest ddos attack in history, against Spamhause, a spam filtering service. He used a single botnet and amplified it through a flaw in the system.
Right, because the 80s didn't have"cool", and "rad", and "cowabunga".
Language evolves. I'm sick and tired of grognards thinking that they are somehow supperior because they don't understand modern culture.
Funny, I never had any issues with Fallout 3 or New Vegas, but every one of my friends who played skyrim in the first few months has had it crash on them pre mods.
The specific type of tax exempt status they were applying for requires them to be a social welfare group and not a political organization. It also allows them to be able to provide annonimity to their donors, which they wouldn't be able to do with other tax exempt statuses.
My PFS Lavode De'Morcaine wrote:
And I would say that that is viable on most full BAB classes close to 95% of the time.The only exceptions are:
When PA will alter your crit chance. (here the math can get wonkey)
When your non-PA damage *.05*PA hit penalty > PA damage * hit% with PA - this is very hard to do with full BAB characters, because other damage bonuses are not that common in high enough quantity.
When you don't need to PA to kill an enemy - this is probably the most common, but it relies on your GM giving you hints as to how tough the enemy is. Its a larger problem at low levels.
I know the internet says I should care about Agent Coulson, but I have a hard time getting worked up about a character whose defining personality trait was dying like a b*+++ to catalyze the heros into taking action. But for his death, no one would be clamboring for a show featuring Agent Coulson (or objecting to a show about SHIELD lacking Agent Coulson). He's just another member in the "unpopular/irrelevant until he died a noble death" brigade, joining such storied members as Doug Ramsey, Jason Todd, and Blink from AoA.
I knew quite a few people who loved the character before the Avengers came out because of his previous appearances.
Nappy-headed though? It's just an adjective. It's not even necessarily pejorative. Stop being afraid of words, people!
Nappy-headed is a degrogetory term for black people. I've only really heard it used that way by people from Texas or Louisiana, so it is likely regonal. Some older people I have heard use it to talk about people who were "passin". So, when used in conjunction with an insult, like ho, it is completely reasonable to say it is racist. It does have other uses as an adjective, but in this context it is used because of its racists overtones.
Have you seen the show? Remove episode specifics and it follows the same pattern as every episode I have seen, and I haven't seen many.
Supposed geniuses do something monumentally dumb (again). Then they have to deal with normal people, and fail misserably, reaffirming everyone's negative oppinion about them by simultaneously being collosal jerks and doing more dumb things.
Its not that you think he doesn't have a right to say something. He has every right to say it. He does not have the right to be pushing said viewpoint through his employer's media to get national coverage, and his employer continuing to allow him to shows their complicity. He doesn't have a right to be shielded from the negative consequences of offending people, and nor is the company. And when these comments are out of the context of what the person is hired to do, it shows a lack of awareness that the company certainly should be concerned about.
As far as boycotts go, contacting the advertisers of certain tv/radio programs and telling them you don't like that they support certain programing can also be effective. Rush has to worry about going off the air despite having a huge fan base because many advertisers avoid his show like the plague.
The WBC skirts the line in the US of being classified as a hate group. If/when they are, many of their legal protections go away. Until it happens, they abuse the legal right to protest by shouting homophobic messages at inappropriate places.
Kahn Zordlon wrote:
Or the companies that are going to mine the lithium could set up safe mines and pay their workers reasonable rates, creating massive advancement in the country that would allow their ecconmy to grow. But since the company will likely be foreign, it wont care and will pay just enough to get people to want a position there over whatever other backbreaking work they could get, provide crappy housing for the people, but then make it too expensive for the people to leave so that they are stuck working there. Kinda like what happened to coal towns in the US.
True, it was the 1.2 patch that made Skyrim's dragons fly backwards.
Kahn Zordlon wrote:
Do you realize that pretty much all of corporate America is the "some crooks" that you are talking about? Hell, you mention ipods, but Apple is constantly getting hammered for piss poor payment to employees while being one of the most profitable companies in the world. Doubling the pay of all their non-managers would be something like 1% of their annual proffits.
Kahn Zordlon wrote:
And by "increase competition for workers," you mean drive salaries down until they barely pay for subsistence living, and then possibly a little lower. I know this because before we created our existing labor laws that is what was happening.
If "Burdening employers with regulation and labor bargining" is preventing someone from opening a buisness, they probably don't have a good enough buisness model to actually turn a profit in a way that will help society, so I don't really care if they can't open. Tell me, how does creating more jobs that pay less than a living wage help increase demand for workers in a way that will drive worker's wages up?
Personally, I am of the other opinion. I think Reaper is handling this great. I have enough information that I know about what is going on but they are not spamming me with useless crap I don't care about and can't affect. Seriously, some of my backed kickstarters feel the need to update daily about every random detail - STOP DOING THAT. It clogs up email and notifications and does nothing to get the product in my hands faster. It only makes me care less about your product as it takes too long for me to bother reading it.
I want updates maybe monthly, an additional one when the product is about to ship, with revised ETA on when it is going to be available. That is pretty much what Reaper has done, and I feel they are handling it well.
DRM is a mistake, and has never been shown to increase game sales. Likewise, removing DRM has never been shown to hurt game sales, and many companies have experienced better than expected sales after removing it. All DRM really does is piss off consumers who have legally bought your product and encourage them to bypass your DRM*. Companies that insist on always on DRM are making dumb buisness moves that have already hurt some, like EA on Sim City.
Personally, I have stopped buying games from EA because of their buisness practices. Not buying their stuff is all that I can really do to tell them I don't want their rediculous draconian anti-piracy crap. I'm a little disappointed that I wont play ME3, but that is the only thing they have made in past few years that I would have thought to buy anyway.
Kahn Zordlon wrote:
By not favoring legislation either way, you favor those who start from the stronger barganing position, which will always be those those with money. Thus, you favor employers having power over the workers. This wont be the case in situations where there is so much competition for labor that workers can choose where to go, but the industries where that is true are rediculously few and far between, and usually have an artifical barrier to entry and/or require significant levels of expertise. If the barriers are skill or knowlesge based, they wont last long, as people will train for those positions to satisfy the need, and then the need wont necessarily stick arround.
Using today's technology, a robot surgeon has better sensors, better dexderity, and access to more information about your health. The only thing we are really missing is the programing. Visual recognition is already being used to diagnose diseases because it can detect smaller errors.
I also disagree with you on music. Some of the modern algorithms can already produce music people can't distinguish from human made. It may be true of live performances, but not of
Nearly anything in the medical field.
I bet within our lifetime surgeons will be robotic. We are already using robots to perform the surgery. All we need is the visual recognition programing.A recent poll of doctors found they would prefer robot to human assistants.
I wouldn't be suprized if we figure out a way to increase neural pathway creation though, and make learning and possibly future intelligence significantly easier.
That would be something that might interest me.
But roman leaders did go into battle with nipple-and-belly-button breastplates. They also had 6-pack abs.
It shows 0 dislikes for me as well.
If I had the chance to take a shot that would give me godlike intelligence, there is another factor to deal with: How many others have had it? If I am the VERY FIRST, I could with some probability gain godlike intelligence and then deny the possibility to all others. Which would put me in a distinctly advantageous situation. Against this weighs the risk that there are unforeseen side effects.
I find it amusing that you go in the exact opposite dirrection. Unless it was a very common thing, I would not want this at all. There is a reason intelligence and happyness have a reverse correlation.
Kahn Zordlon wrote:
WTF?Why would the company pay a worker who has bought his own nailgun more when they can just purchase a nailgun and have multiple people use it? Lets say they pay the guy with his own equipment $1/hr more. He is at most bringing a few hundred dollars of his own tools. He is the only one who can use them, so you only have access to those tools for 1 shift. Over the course of 2 months, the $1/hr will have paid for all of his tools. So, should the company take a 2 month hit to increase their ability to hire multiple people to use the tools and not be locked in to a specific person for a major efficiency upgrade on an investment that will pay off over multiple years? Add on that it would be cheaper than hiring 1 extra person for 1-2 days for a 4-5x efficiency increase. No buisness is going to pass that up.
Meanwhile, that gun would represent a significant investment on the part of the employee. It is more than a day's work to buy, for someone living paycheck to paycheck. It is a doable investment, but not one made lightly.
Kahn Zordlon wrote:
Well, the corralative evidence disagrees with you. The fact is, as we implemented unions the ecconomy grew leaps and bounds and then as we started dismantling unions the ecconomy has stagnated, with new growth primarily through sectors created through government spending.
Bill Dunn wrote:
I know tax act automatically assumes a value and then asks you if you want to change it.
Skeletal Steve wrote:
You would be suprized how much the incentive of "you can only collect tax if you follow these rules" will cause people to voluntarily follow those rules.
Which is why this bill includes language to force states to clean up their tax code laws for ease of use by the system.
Seriously, those aspects are trivial compared to what gets handled by companies and government every day. You are looking at a multi-year software development cycle to handle them, followed by an extensive vetting process. There will be kinks in the system initially that will need to be worked out. But this process is valuable and necessary as online purchasing becomes more standard.
You set up a module that takes the customer information, most likely zip code, submits it to a central database and returns the specific tax rate and governmental bodies owed. You document the standard format of the input and output of the module. People then download it and attach it to their code, and then deal with the tax exactly how they deal with tax now. Companies then probably need to add some information into their database to track how much is owed to each agency.Seriously, this is a really easy coding problem.
Kirth Gersen wrote:
This is what I have seen as well.
Huffington Post article on McDonals CEO pay vs Costco
If I am not mistaken it is entirely based on where you live, not where you physically ARE at the time of purchase.
I think so too. I'm pretty sure there are already laws on the books for physical purchases out of state that are brought accross state lines. FOr instance, if you buy a car out of state, I believe you still need to pay your state's sales tax. The dealer doesn't collect it, but it is your responcibility to.
And you would be wrong. It is only the buyer's state that must collect sales tax, because that is considered the point of sale.
Surface area (SA) = 2*pi*r*h + 2*pi*r^2Volume = pi*r^2*h = 100 cm^3
SA = 200/r + 2*pi*r^2
dSA/dr = -200/r^2 +4*pi*r set equal to 0 to find minimum
r=3√(50/pi) (cubic root) = 2.51...~= 2.5cm
h= 5.03... using exact value for r. 2.5cm results in 5.09... or ~5.1 cm.
A landscape photographer is taking long exposure pictures.To achieve a blue sky at night, the lens must recieve a luminous exposure of at least 1000 lux seconds. The current luminous emittance of the sky is 5 lux, but its rate of decay is <insert appropriate logrithmic formula> lux/minute. How long must the camera exposure be?
The photographer wants the house in the picture to be lit up inside. To appear occupied, the windows must be between 8000 and 10000 lux seconds. Assuming each window produces 300 lux when the lights are on, how long must the lights be turned on durring the camera exposure?
The ambient light from neighbors homes creates 10 lux on a tree in the background. The photo will be washed out if the lux seconds exceeds 15000. What is the latest time the photographer can open his shutter before this light will ruin the image? How long is this exposure?
Every question here can be solved with performing a single integration and using the produced formula. It is a scenareo that I have personally dealt with. It is something photographers should understand, but don't necessarily need to worry about because they can use experience of what levels of lux will cause will cause issues with what exposures. But that baseline had to be developed.
For annother one:
Supplemental equasions if they have not also taken physics 1:
- I had roughly this question on my highschool physics AP exam.
Erik Mona wrote:
Personally, I think she is way overused in season 6. I haven't gotten to season 7 yet.
In general, I find Moffat is making the story too much about the companions, including River, and not enough about exploring wierd places and traveling. The show needs more filler episodes.
I never said they weren't. But they can make a logical argument that cannot be outright dismissed (there are plenty of arguments against it).
Church leaders who perform marriages are acting as agents of the court. As an agent of the court, why it reasonable for them to perform active descrimination based off of gender?
The few people I know who argue this are some of the farthest left of my generally left wing friends, and as I said had explosive arguments with other people I would consider left wing over it. These people are also some of the most vocal about gender equality though, so the idea that they might be what the right sees when they look for examples is quite possible. It would be the reverse of everyone seeing the worste of supposed christians because crazy right wing pundits and preachers are the most vocal.
Read the FAQ:
I really like Stephen Colbert and the Onion. When a comedian really knows his material and can present a situation that sounds pretty ludicrous but instead of just jumping up and down and saying, "I'm making fun of this!" he instead presents it completely strait-faced and in a serious manner while never breaking character, that is when true comedic genius can occur."
The Minis Maniac wrote:
Actually, I do know people who argue that churches not marrying gay and lesbian couples should be illegal. When NY passed its gay marriage bill, it was delayed a short time so that language could be added to include protections for churches. Most people I know saw this as a worthwhile ammendment that was needed, but it did explode my friend circle and one person left it and no longer associates with anyone else "because they were a bunch of sexist bastards." This included multiple other openly bi and homosexual people.