Posts by The Commenter formally known as Matt

Re: They're both full of $#!T - Someone is Lying

In a couple of places the two blog posts seem to directly contradict each other:

Musk says it never ran out of power, Broder says the car warned it was shutting down and then did. So either one of them is lying or the car will shut-down when there is power remaining.

Musk claims Broder was told to keep charging one the last leg and stopped "expressly against the advice of Tesla personnel". Broder states he was told to charge for one hour then continue "expressly on the instructions of Tesla personnel". Again one of them must be lying.

Musk claims Broder took an unplanned detour through lower Manhattan, Broder claims he had a planned stop in a different part of Manhattan which added about two miles to the trip. Weather the detour was planned or unplanned frankly makes little difference as, presumably, every Tesla owner doesn't OK their journey plan with Tesla beforehand. I don't understand why Musk cares about this, unless it was a big detour not the two miles Broder claims.

Six days after the trip when Broder asked for copies of the logged data, presumably before the story was published (assumption on my part) "to compare against my notes and recollections" i.e. ensure his review was accurate. Tesla said they "did not store data on exact locations where their cars were driven because of privacy concerns". Later they published a bunch of this data that doesn't exist. So either he is lying about this, they lied to him about it existing or it was fabricated at a later date.

Based on current statements I believe either Musk, Broder or Both of them are lying. With such conflicting statements it doesn't seem possible that this is all just a misunderstanding.

Re: 5 guys

I wouldn't rob a bank with you as you are clearly hard of thinking, it's probably your fault we got caught anyway.

Apple and their publisher buddies didn't conspire to rob people of millions, they are accused of price fixing, that is offering goods for sale at a higher price than they would if they were competing properly.

Offering goods for sale at a high price and forcibly taking peoples cash from them are two different crimes with different levels of severity and hence different penalties.

DO YOU UNDERSTAND NOW or should I say it again, S-L-O-W-E-R?

Re: if they can do this with cds, why can't they do this with books?

one step at a time, anon, one step at a time

Re: Google claims HOW many active users? They hired Romney?

>My current "activity" is to allow Google+ to upload pictures from my smartphone--and I increasingly regret my choice of Android.

Then why do you have this functionality turned on? I remember installing the G+ app on my phone and it specifically asked me if I wanted auto upload turned on, seems a bit silly and a waste of data allowance if you have no plans of using it!

Re: "For some reason he doesn't want to submit to that process"

I apologise unreservedly for both the insult and the profound worry which I inadvertently caused

Re: I for one welcome our new dignified Chinese expo overlords....

You don't see any benefit to something, so it should be banned for everyone.

I guess you really did learn something from the Chinese (or the think of the children brigade)!

prior art [...] applies globally

So did the bbc get this wrong:

'HTC defeats Apple in swipe-to-unlock patent dispute'

""National patent laws thematically are very similar, but can be applied very differently.

"Not only are the tests different but also the evidence that can be introduced in different courts varies. If the Neonode wasn't released in the US it might not be able to be cited there.

"So the fact that Apple has lost this particular patent battle in the UK shouldn't mean it should be seen to have lost the global war.""

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-18709232

Re: I wish they'd gone with Bing

I may be wrong but I believe FRAND applies to patents not services

TBH I don't see anything wrong with that, I think when it comes to negotiation its only natural to hold your cards close to your chest and try to not give anything away - who ever is (or appears to be) most willing to walk away gets the best deal.

It's why we have middlemen and brokers etc (well one of the reasons anyway).

A (kinda stretched) analogy:

If I pay someone to wash my car for £10 and they later find out I'm a millionaire, they don't get pissed that they didn't charge me £200.

<< Pirate, cos someone is clearly trying to fleece someone else, just not sure who is the victim!

Re: Double insult

"<-- My kind of piss."

You drink Carling?

Re: "even the movies often fail to get the genre right."

Sean,

You don't like a lot of popular fantasy; fair enough.

You seem to want to:

a) convince the world that things they enjoy actually suck

b) redefine a genre into something less popular / different.

Telling people that, essentially, their tastes suck and yours are awesome isn't really a winning strategy. Nor is it going to make you any friends.

I guess my point is: grow up.

Re: STA Travel...

The article does not say STA Travel have no liability for their misleading adverts, it just says Google *do* have responsibility for publishing misleading adverts.

They both were naughty.

I presume STA Travel were charged separately.

only the sith deal in absolutes

A boycott is a viable form of protest, but isn't the only one.

Petitions and letter writing are acceptable ways of letting a company know that you, as a customer, are not happy with their behaviour. If they ignore you, or decide to continue with their current practices then you as an individual can make a decision to take your business elsewhere, or not.

To suggest that the only option is for everyone to go straight to boycott, without first registering your discontent, is rather extreme and, frankly, a bit silly.

and if you do boycott, let the company know or they probably wont notice!

take a look at waze, on android and iphone (and blackberry)

I think you mean the sale of goods act, AFAIK the Consumer Rights Act doesn't exist, so they would be quite correct to refuse of acknowledge its existence!

"What if they haven't got any benefits to withdraw?"

thats just crazy talk

but a lot of games from the 80s/90s were fun!

A lot of the facebook style games need imagination, rather than fast paced fancy graphics, and people seem to love that.

To be an obvious troll:

The markets are intended to allow people to buy and sell assets.

These guys are buying and selling assets, so their behaviour is congruent with a markets raison d'etre.

>If the only benefit to the system is in providing liquidity

But if I buy a stock with my monthly savings the only benefit I am providing to the market is 'liquidity'. Should I be banned? (Hopefully I am providing benefit to myself with future value, and benefit to the seller who wants cash now. But that is true of these guys as well)

and to stop being a troll;

I sort of understand where you are coming from but, to my mind, there is a big difference between 'these guys are harming stuff' and 'these guys haven't justified their profits to the baying mob'

In fairness the site doesn't claim to do any testing. Its a bit odd it doesn't check you are running windows before marking for that but it is clearly aimed at the great unwashed who all use windows.

I wonder what score anyone running a Mac gets? This site does seem a little un-thought out.

You mean 268 not 253, and that is the highway code, not law.

in most cases you don't have this right, so you can't give it up.

Wanting something you don't have is not the same as giving up something you do have.

My habits seem to be becoming:

Turn Tv on

Begin watching

Go to kitchen to get drink

Get distracted, do some washing up

Start playing on computer

Girlfriend gets home, gets confused and asks why the cats are watching star trek

(Icon for my shameful waste of leccy)

presumably Alan has his own beliefs, why do you feel the need to shove yours down his throat?

I sort of agree with you regarding younger generations getting softer (myself included!) but on the other hand you can't dismiss improving working conditions as totally being a bad thing!

We have, in general in the west, moved away from working hard to survive to working to improve our lot.

but if IBM registered lotus.car or lotus.shoes then it would be a clear case of trademark infringement.

if the new domain is .generic then yes who ever got there first would get it.

it would be a pretty inefficient heater if it didn't have a heating element.

or add a light or buzzer or something

It sounds like you are suggesting that anyone who can be bothered to sign a petition can't "be bothered to get off their arses and actually vote"?

I would have thought someone showing enough interest to petition would have more than enough motivation to vote.

>enough's enough.

>If the offenders are minors, then try them as adults.

Yeah and also I don't think they should have access to lawyers, or have any right to a fair trial either

point of order

>and tell him I maintain the copyrights on the designs which he can't have.

Lucas didn't do this bit.

I know this wasn't what was argued in the case, but if you start making up facts to support your case then your whole post is... doomed (last word said in a generic voice, def not sounding like a slightly depressed android, sorry droid)

>And if he's wanted somewhere for eating children?

then thumbs down to the guy

@AC

Really?

a) Different in quantity? Do you have any evidence that the average freetard post torrents/internet has more content (that they would otherwise buy) pirated compared to pre torrents/internet. I would suspect not.

b) Better quality? Well yes, pirated stuff is better quality than it used to be, but so is paid stuff. Better technology is better I suppose, doesn't really make pirating any worse than it used to be. (and I would suggest the vast majority of pirated songs / movies etc are piss poor quality anyway)

c) Pish, Albums are dead anyway. Yes it is easier to get (pirated and to a lesser extent legal) movies and TV shows now (I don't have to wait for them to be shown on BBC/ITV anymore) but again this is better technology being better, not really making the modern 'home taping' any worse than it used to be.

But you are right Crossley's actions don't really have much effect on the morality of pirating content.