Content id is not dmca, rather it is a voluntary system that Google has put together to avoid being completely snowed over by diva requests. This also has the side effect of not giving those affected by it the protections that are in the dmca. Though if content id fails the content provider is supposed to issue a dmca request.
252 posts • joined 5 Nov 2008
Re: I reckon that I have something...
How about Hercules in new york starring Arnold Schwarzenegger
Re: Commercial use forbidden?
This was for Microsoft office personal edition - i.e. you've not paid them enough to make money from their software.
I would imagine that it's to try to keep your stolen credential access hidden for as long as possible. There's probably some other exploits that enable you to mimic being a domain admin to run a single bit of code or something like that.
It's the same as centripetal force, just from the frame of reference inside the object been spun. So what's probably happening is that the centrifugal forces inside the fuel tanks is keeping the fuel against the wrong part of the tank for the pumps to work (considering that this stage is designed to work with the acceleration forces to resolve towards the thrusters rather than the walls)
Re: Fingers crossed!
Evidently it's not sufficiently different from standard, and supersonic aerodynamics that you could say it wasn't
Re: Why land at sea?
I would imagine it's to do with trajectory, time and speed. As Russia is absolutely massive in the right direction. Also consider that they are launching from Florida and going east to gain an acceleration boost from the rotation of the earth. Unless they reach Europe or africa, there isn't much land to land on.
Finally, as this is still in prototype stage, if something goes wrong they can just ditch the stage and try next time. Over land you need to worry about what it's going to hit if it doesn't work.
Re: Fingers crossed!
Simple answer to why we weren't doing this in the 80's/90's is computing power vs computing mass, image recognition, and CAD - every prototype would have needed to be built and tested rather than all the obvious failures been found in the computer simulations before building them. All of the above change the time to develop this sort of thing and increase the cost massively.
It is interesting to note that we were able to use a well developed technology to build the shuttle, namely aerodynamics.
That's until you find out why that's their policy. The reason is that a fire drill happened in one of their buildings and everyone left except the man in a wheelchair that was there for his assessment, who was left by all of the staff except a security guard, who stayed with him. No one tried to carry him downstairs, or waited until the rush had gone past to do so, he was just sacrificed to the fire. The fire safety officer wasn't best pleased, and they changed their policies so that no one that needs a wheelchair is allowed to go to a facility that not on the ground floor. However their document just says that if you need additional assistance getting up and down stairs, call this number. Which as I was going with her, we didn't feel we needed additional assistance. You can google to verify this story :)
Also to note that the questionnaire that they use has been ruled illegal in the USA because it is discriminatory against disabled people.
So I say again, get your wife to appeal if it's not too late or reapply, and she should be back on benefits soon
They cancelled her first appointment because we turned up with her in a wheel chair, and their health and safety policies wouldn't allow them to see someone in a wheelchair at that location unless they could guarantee being able to get down the stairs in the event of a fire alarm.
Her second appointment was cancelled because they didn't have recording facilities at the site at the time they gave us, and we had requested the appointment be recorded. We're still waiting for the next appointment.
Also everything that I've read says that the mistake your partner made is in answering as if good days exist. All the advice I've read says to answer the questions as if a bad day is your normal day. So if you can't walk 100 yards on a bad day (or normal depending on how frequent your bad days are) then you say no, not sometimes.
Edit: while I remember, atos has lost the contract for all new appointments
I'm assuming that this was an atos special, if so then I would recommend appealing or re-applying as something like 80% of appeals succeed.
Source lots of reading because my wife is also on benefits and has her atos appointment coming up soon.
They can simulate the factorisation problem with a classical computer running a virtual quantum computer. However the classical computer can only model so many qbits before it becomes infeasibly slow (kinda like trying to model an ipad using an 08086). This means that they can verify the results that a machine is providing by running it through their simulations to see if it comes up with the same answer.
Re: Prehaps we need to understand the core problem
You're missing one very important fact about the past which is what this ruling is actually about. That fact is that news papers didn't get re-printed every day, and neither did the associated indexes. Therefore the only people that had access to the embarrassing information were those that had saved it at the time it was printed or those that trawled through the news paper archives looking for it and then had it printed out.
Enter the digital age and search engines. Suddenly every news article on the internet is available as if it were printed today.
So no, this isn't about censorship. This clarification of the law does not in any way require a news paper, library, or other sort of archive to delete or destroy information. This is wholly about allowing someones indiscretions of the past to remain in the past - unless they are of public interest (such as an unspent criminal conviction, or the news article has been referenced recently in another news article)
Unless it's been in the news recently. Don't forget that this only applies to searches for your name, not for searches for the name of an organisation, an event, place + date, etc. So if something that's no longer relevant happened to John Smith of plastow in 1976, you should be able to find it if it would come up with a search of plastow 1976 but not if you search John Smith 1976
Re: "Up To 60%"
Timestamped Mobile phone IP's are very revealing if you're in law enforcement ;)
The biggest problem I had with switching to wpf was that in order to use databinding properly requires a massive shift in the way that you think about problems. I gave myself many many headaches while learning in order to Grok it. I'd imagine that you'd have the same sort of headaches learning functional programming if you're used to procedural. (never tried functional)
The main piece of advice I can give about WPF is that the UI designer is really there for modifing properties that are a pain in the arse to type in manually. Everything else should be done in the xaml text editor (with the visual bit still showing).
Also lean about mc:ignorable and d:datacontext as they will make your life so much easier.
Re: I've given up writing applications for Windows full stop.
Have a look at the new Visual Studio community edition - it's free and is identical to the professional edition if you're a lone developer. (no msdn subscription included)
Also the problem that you're having with your installers is probably that they're not signed with a certificate from a known authority.
I migrated to wpf about 4 years ago now, and once I got over the learning curve of how wpf windows fit together and learnt how to work with wpf rather than trying to shoehorn wpf into winforms (Things like using hierarchical data templates and providing a pre-built tree rather than trying to walk the visual stack to find out what's selected). Over the last year we've been learning MVVM, and now the value of WPF really shines. As by divorcing the screen from the code means that we can implement customisable screens (load xaml from a file or database on startup) without it breaking the window. What we've also found is that the extra time spent setting up an MVVM application pays itself back in spades later during maintenance.
Right and Wrong, and why I think you are
I think that you are both right and wrong at the same time, but that's because there are two different things that need to be taken into account. One is that someone that partakes of risky behaviour is more likely to die off sooner, and thus in the long haul, cost the NHS less - This is where you're right. Where you're wrong however is in making the implied assumption that front loaded costs that are smaller overall is better than a more even spread of costs overall but cost more over a longer period of time.
If I offered you a loan and the pay back on the loan was either £200/month over 10 years or £100/month over 25 years which one would be cheaper? If you were looking at your monthly bills you might say the £100/month even though it will cost you £6000 more however you're saving £100/month. If you could afford the £200/month you'd probably say that that was the cheaper option as you'd be saving £6000 over all.
Re: More hmm...
with a TV crew camped on your doorstep
So you want to dissolve Google then?
Re: a couple of misconceptions
Yes there is, as if the carbon tax does everything it's supposed to do there will be no tax income from that particular tax. Then who pays for the rubbish collection, or the health service?
Re: How to set the tax?
But how do you account for things like smelting, power production, red diesel, etc. Where they all directly produce carbon emissions if they use fossil fuels, but not if they don't. However the price the end consumer pays doesn't directly have any bearing on whether the source company used fossil fuels or not.
Re: How to set the tax?
Wouldn't we need to be applying that tax at source rather than at the pump for it to really work? As, as things stand I believe that there are different tax rates on your carbon emissions depending on who you are. So at the refinery or as in import tax on coal/gas?
From my understanding of historical temperature records, the problems have been that when they were made we didn't understand that things like urban heat islands even existed let along the ramifications it would have on temperature records. They also weren't as rigorous about how the readings were taken, so the time of day, and whether it was in shade wasn't necessarily followed as precisely as needed.
Based on that once we did find out about those things we needed to go back and make adjustments to the old temperature records based on where the temperature was taken from at the time. This being a judgement call by the interpreter means that individual historical models could be very different. Thus the NASA adjustments.
I don't believe that this is supposed to be a predictive model, rather it's supposed to tell us how stuff moves from a to b. When we understand that we can then start to discover other things that are useful such as where's the best place to plant forests to absorb CO2, where's most of the CO2 coming from, what paths does it take, how does it correlate to weather conditions.
Understanding the why of the past is often key to being able to affect the future in the way you want.
Re: Additional explanation?
So far as I know the only non genital/giving birth related thing that's different between men and women and can be proven to be down to sex is the relative strength at the upper end of the spectrum (i.e. men tend to be stronger and can be much stronger than women). everything else could be social/cultural - i.e. nurture
Re: Additional explanation?
I suspect that a lot of the hunter gatherer differences are down to the fact that men get more practice at the spacial awareness stuff because they're more expendable to the tribe (how many men does it take to re-populate the tribe in one generation vs how many women) thus are freer/compelled to take on the more dangerous tasks of ranging and locating new resources. While the women get to learn the area that they live in more, and are thus better at gathering the resources than the men.
Re: So how secure are 'biometrics'?
Why does everyone automatically jump to fingerprints as soon as anyone mentions biometrics. Of the entire set of things that you could use on the human body (non-invasively) for biometric checks, the fingerprint is just a fairly small subset.
The most recent one that I've seen going into general use eschews fingerprints for scanning the pattern of the blood vessels in your finger.
Re: argh -- have to go anon for this one.
What we did in the UK is forced BT (the incumbent operator) to logically separate it's operations into 2 or more internal companies - BT Wholesale and BT Retail are the one's we're concerned with here. The next thing they did was they said that BT Wholesale is not allowed to sell access to the cables for more than it's charging BT Retail. It's also not allowed to sell access to the wires directly. Lastly, any ISP can buy access from BT Wholesale, and also put equipment in the exchanges.
This means that the natural monopoly of the infrastructure to individual houses is owned and managed by a company that has a vested interest in maintaining the service and providing a fault free experience. While the back haul from the exchange is now open to competition.
For things like gas, water, and sewage I disagree as it's not so much an issue of want as it is practicality (Sewage and water esp. can use very large pipes) and scarcity of space. I would imagine that there are plenty of large houses that have more than 1 of a type of pipe going into the property, but they all come from the same mains pipe.
Re: But American utilities such as water and electricity are privatised monopolies
Erm, how would a second set of gas, even work in a house as you can't exactly switch the supply of gas to appliances? Same with water and sewage. They're on a grid system because of the practicalities rather than desires, as to have 2 pipes of anything coming into the house would mean duplicating everything that used that resource.
Electricity already has this available in the way of multiphase wiring, so you can actually have multiple electricity supplies, but the electricity company only generally lets you do this if you need more voltage than the standard 1 phase input allows.
I believe that a natural monopoly does exist, but only in relation to the wires in the road. Basically it doesn't make sense to put down more than one set of gas pipes, electricity cables, water pipes, sewage pipes, telephone cables, roads, train tracks, etc. Thus these are all natural monopolies. But beyond the management of the last mile infrastructure, I don't believe there are natural monopolies and the government should recognise that by forcing a separation in law.
Re: @Tim Worstall - it's so unlike Tim Worstall to get the wrong end of the issue, isn't it?
From everything that I've seen about the tories trying to cut spending to below income is that the government is now in the same position millions of people in the UK are where their loans are taking up so much of their income that they've already stopped spending on anything they consider luxuries and are now having to cut into essentials which means that the amount they can cut is very limited.
Re: Space isn't orbit
Don't forget that the hard part of space travel is actually getting into orbit. If we can perfect that then we can then work on getting the rest of the journey working better. It could also lead to developments of orbital production platforms (orbital drydocks for example)
Re: It's not inequality, it's poverty
The problem is that in most 1st world countries poverty isn't really poverty. What it is is income disparity and the effects that that has on your ability to get by. So in a very real sense the problem is that the people that are driving the prices up in the local area are earning so much more than the people that support the infrastructure in that area that they (the have-nots) are inching closer and closer to relying on the welfare state and having to move away to a more affordable area but still somehow keep their job. However the story being about the USA means that there isn't a welfare state to fall back on, and thus they will end up in real hardship while still earning more than those that are actually on or below the poverty line.
@cray74 - One other thing to consider is that the rocket is essentially disposable as everyone make a new one for the next launch. IIRC the only exceptions have been the shuttle, the xr-32 (or whatever it is) space plane, and the shuttles fuel tank. Every other rocket is built for that particular launch. If you operated planes in the same way I virtually guarantee that there would be a similar level of testing involved.
Space X with their grasshopper technology may be the first since the shuttle to have a reusable rocket. At which point the feasibility of rigorous testing of the actual completed rocket comes into the realms of we can do this.
Re: So why bother to send a letter of request to a foreign country...
I figure that what they should do is get a warrant for hacking the server, and once they locate the server either the server is in the USA at which point the warrant still stands, the server is in a country they have a treaty with at which point they did their good faith bit by getting the warrant in the first place and now they can in good faith get assistance from the Icelandic government. Finally if it's in a country with no treaty they can ask a diplomat for advice and, because they've already got a warrant whatever course of action is advised will have started in good faith.
Re: never forget though
Marketing, otherwise known as highlighting all the positives while minimising the negatives.
Re: Clean energy NOW
If they weren't caring about that possibility and making sure that it couldn't happen then there's nothing to stop them using the same material they use in bombs in pure enough concentrations that if there was a failure in the system they could form a critical mass.
Hence I was saying that the reason nuclear is expensive is specifically to avoid those sorts of situations and to make it the safest form of electricity generation currently available.
In short, if you ignored all of the safeguards that we have in place for nuclear and used the wrong radio active material, you could indeed get an explosion. Which as I said not so directly in my previous post, would be stupid.
Re: Clean energy NOW
Nuclear isn't expensive because of excessive bureaucracy - although that's part of the reason. It's expensive because of all the failsafes that need to be built into the station, and the fact that you need to employ highly qualified people for all of the important jobs in the station. The actual fuel is pretty cheap/GW compared to other fuels.
Why do we need all the failsafes? Because if something goes catastrophically wrong at a coal plant you get devastation within about a mile of the station at worst. If the same happens at a nuclear plant it could be because some fissile material has achieved critical mass and is the right type to actually cause an explosion, at which point you could be looking at devastation within 5-10 miles and problems outside that area.
The result of all this is that Nuclear power is the safest source of power/GW in the world.
Re: Well we'd need a more refined bill of rights
>> Of course if they started DRMing food/essentials you might have a leg to stand on.
>I think Monsanto would disagree with you on that.
I don't believe they are DRMing their products, and if they did I'm pretty sure that various governments would have strong words with them. But growing GM food is a different topic to purchasing the end product, and should probably take place in a different setting. Suffice to say that my issue with GM food is when they start making it so that you can't grow from G2 seed, rather than you're not allowed to grow from G2 seed.
Re: Well we'd need a more refined bill of rights
The choice you have is whether to buy or not buy the movie legally. It's not as if these things are essential for your survival.
Of course if they started DRMing food/essentials you might have a leg to stand on. But as it stands they are only DRMing luxuries. And while they're only DRMing luxuries you have the option of not having said luxury.
Additionally I'm pretty sure that you could approach a studio and ask them for a DRM free copy of the film that you want. Though you can expect to be laughed at if you're not rich enough or from the right industry. But if you're rich enough I'm sure they'd sell you one for a few hundred thousand pounds.
Well it could mean that they fared worse, or it could mean he's only ever torture tested one thing...
Re: But is a fluid definition a bad thing?
Incorrect, he's actually written an article saying that absolute poverty IN THE UK is indeed gone. He said nothing about the rest of the world. So no where is he saying that it's now time to address relative poverty. I take that to mean that he's saying that when world wide absolute poverty is gone, we can look to address relative poverty.
As a point, why wouldn't they just cut the cable and then during the few days that the company is scrambling to deal with the outage install their gear at the friendly end of the cable? It would give them plenty of time to do this sort of thing and make it much easier to change later.
Re: Creation and Duplication
Given that, as a private individual, you can buy a ream of really good quality paper for less than £10, and you can also get companies to deliver 100's lbs of goods in the same country for around a score. Do you really think that the dead tree edition of the books that you've got were the main sink for the money you spent on them?
No, the main money sinks were in the time that people took before the book on your shelf existed to create the master copy that your book is a copy of. If you tot up the cost of everyone's time and expenses from the time the author puts pen to paper, to the moment the printing plates have been produced and production is ready to begin you'll probably find that that's a pretty large chunk of cash. Add a small percentage on in case another book doesn't do so well and you're approaching the true cost for the publisher.
Someone else has done the work to analyse these figures here http://ireaderreview.com/2009/05/03/book-cost-analysis-cost-of-physical-book-publishing/
Looking at those figures, you're only going to save around 50% of the price of a dead tree edition book, most of which is the retailers costs rather than the publishers costs. Which when I look at amazon for books that have been out for a while seems to be where their prices end up.
Re: "Refine the fuel from ice".
You can brute force fuel by electrolysis using just solar electricity. If you take up a nuclear power source you can do it faster. If you have some carbon around you can then turn the hydrogen into a safer and more portable fuel using electricity and a catalyst.
It doesn't matter if it's slow as long as it's not too slow.
As a side thought though, once you've got your momentum going wouldn't you be using ion engines to move through the solar system anyway? At which point you need fairly small amounts of actual fuel, and would be using the hydrogen/oxygen for escaping gravity wells that are stronger than your ion engines only.
Re: There are so many problems.
In theory the problem is one of getting to the asteroid belts to mine in the first place as having the fuel to return to earth shouldn't be a problem as soon as you find a few Ice bearing asteroids. Of course you need to work out how to refine the fuel from the water in the first place, but that's something that can be perfected fairly close to earth.
What's the betting that the first structure built outside earths gravitational field is a fuel depot/station with massive solar panels for the refining.