If it WAS an astro-/cosmonaut...
...I expect the story to show up in "Who, Me?" someday
1543 posts • joined 8 Feb 2007
"Why do retired senior US intelligence officials get to keep their top secret security clearances? Why are they entitled to on-going briefing on top secret matters when they're no longer working for the government?"
There have been cases of former intelligence officers being called in to consult in "This is what we THINK is happening, but you've dealt with this guy face-to-face -- what do YOU think is going on?" cases. For that, they need clearances to get to look at the raw data. I don't necessarily think a clearance should be revoked at the instant that someone leaves a TLA, but I can see a case to be made for a sunset clause: after n-number of years, that sort of interpersonal data becomes too stale to be useful and clearances should be allowed to lapse.
Seems to me that the solution is to run benchmarks continuously until either the battery runs down or the phone cooks itself to death and publish those results alongside the battery life under normal use.
It puts the benchmark and battery life numbers into a usable context.
"'As we repeatedly point out, Apple makes its money from selling overpriced hardware'
It's all about the money, money, money - they don't really give a toss about YOU, just your pocket."
Back in the '70s, an aftermarket automobile oil filter company ran a series of ads featuring a supposed auto shop mechanic extolling the virtues of their product. The tag line was "You can pay me now, or... Pay me later."
Plus ça change...
"As in taking something and depriving the owner of it. Copyright violation is not theft, copyright violation is copyright violation."
Copyright is the right to determine who can legally own a copy of something... It's kinda right there in the name. Copyright, in the U.S., is a property right, and property rights are defensible in court, even if the property in question is not physically removed (e.g., trespass).
Further, appropriating the fruits of someone else's labor without their consent constitutes "theft of services", or doesn't the U.K. have that one?
Not a linguist by trade, but my understanding is that the Normans had picked up a lot of Romanized terms -- as one does when trying not to appear a parvenue after invading the West. Meanwhile, the Angles/Saxons/Jutes kept much of their language, generally not bothering to learn more than the minimum British needed to get their message across*. So, in the end, their words tended to be short and their sentences direct, until their Romanized brethren showed up with their posh talk and fancy grammar.
Thus, for instance, the Anglo-Saxon serfs butchered sheep and deer, while the Normans ate mutton and venison, the poor shat while the rich defecated, etc., so the rule of thumb became "If it's monosyllabic, it's Anglo-Saxon, if it's polysyllabic, it's probably a Norman import."
* -- This also explains why English is the rare language that, in general, doesn't gender its nouns: The British nouns had gender but the invading Saxons, et al, couldn't be bothered to learn them, so they just didn't. "Bring food!" was clear enough to get the job done, so that was it.
"Instead of defending them with some ridiculous "whataboutism" as though the kettle wasn't as black as the pot. If it's not criminal because it's in the past, why the current fuss about past actions by the Cheeto?"
Because he IS in the office right now and his historic pattern of behavior is relevant to anticipating possible decisions on the future direction of the country, unlike a failed candidate who has no ability to set policy.
"... taking it from a website with no indication of copyright)..."
"© The copyright for all texts, photos and the design lies with schwarzaufweiss or the authors. All rights reserved. Despite great care, we can not completely rule out mistakes in content. Therefore, all information is provided without obligation and guarantee by schwarzaufweiss or the respective author, who also assume no responsibility and liability for possible errors. Disclaimer: Despite careful control, we assume no liability for the content of external links. The content of the linked pages are the sole responsibility of their operators.
"Internet travel magazine schwarzaufweiss GbR
On the Schevemoorer Heide 13
Umsatzsteueridentifikationsnr. DE 219058189
Authorized representative and responsible person according to § 5Tmg .: Helmuth Weiss
Webdesign: Stephan Eigendorf & Helmuth Weiss"
So, while they don't tell you who holds the copyright of a specific asset on the site, it tells you who your first contact to get that information should be.
I found this in less than two minutes and ich sprech keine Deutsch.
...because the self-righteous (self-reicheous?) have never been shy about identifying themselves as the "saved", "awake", non-kool-aid-drinking, red-pill-taking World Heroes(tm) that they think they are.
On the other hand, if someone or some group of someones WANTS to pay $280 each (plus attendant expenses, if any) for a chance to get an ass-whuppin' in support of a false-flag operation, who am I to say no?
Just as a followup to this: Wristwatches were considered effeminate (we still see some echoes of this in the fact that metal bands are often still referred to as "bracelets") until they were taken up by pilots in WWI who could look at their wrists more easily than digging a watch out of a pocket of their bulky flying suits in a cramped cockpit.
The More You Know...
"What's the compelling use case for a smart watch then?"
The problem with this question is that what it's REALLY asking is "What's the compelling use case for a smart watch FOR ME then?", which is unanswerable for anyone but you. I am reminded of this every time El Reg puts up a story about phone or tablet sales. The "I just want a telephone with $RidiculouslyLongBatteryLife," or "Tablets are toys with no compelling use case," brigades come out and proceed to ignore or actively dismiss EVERYONE who points out that, FOR THEM, $Function or feature is indispensable or has, at the least, simplified their life in some way.
It's perfectly fine to say "I see no compelling use case in $Gadget for ME," but another thing altogether to generalizie to "There is no use case for $Gadget." One is intellectual honesty and one... isn't.
"I'm going to try and let you all (the current committers) figure it out for yourselves."
Fortunately, given the "many eyes" theory of open source, we can at least be assured that -- whatever form the resulting administrative system takes -- it will be simple, breathtakingly logical, and satisfactory to all involved.
"Buying outright a throw away phone and choosing a reasonable contact you are literally saving 1000's, especially over a two year period."
True enough, if you're into "throw-away".
OTOH, if you plan to trade in or resell an older high-end phone, Apples still tend to hold their value better, reducing the cost of your new phone by, potentially, a few hundred [MonetaryUnits].
Delaware is the second-smallest (by land area) state in the U.S. Thus, they hit on the idea of making really easy incorporation their main cash crop. It's not uncommon at all to see the note "A Delaware corporation" in small print on a company's ads or website.
Here's a brief spot to give you an idea of the scale:
I think I prefer the original title for "Along the Scenic Route": "Dogfight on 101". I remember when it came out in the late '60s. Great story, although I have to admit that -- being an illustrator -- I bought the mag more for the beautiful techno title page illustration by Jim Steranko than for the Ellison story.
I agree that his prose and his personality could be off-putting at times, but he spun off concepts like an ideating Catherine Wheel. He will be missed.
I think the article is missing some information:
If the modem chip violates Qualcomm's patent, why is the buyer of the chip being sued instead the chip maker? Unless QC is claiming that the other would never have infringed if Apple hadn't induced them to do so, I'm not sure I see the argument from QC's point of view. (As opposed to the lawyer's POV... I think I know that!)
Does anyone know offhand if the (allegedly) violated patent is a FRAND case? Being a modem, I'm assuming that it is, but it's unclear -- and, again, I should think that that would be an issue with the modem maker, not the phone maker.
But, then, IANAL -- so what do *I* know?
"When something interesting presents itself I think the primal urge to get a piece of the action is far stronger than vague notions of tactics or common sense."
"I want tell you about the town of Stockbridge, Massachusets, where this happened here. They got three stop signs, two police officers, and one police car. But when we got to the "Scene of the Crime" there was five police officers and three police cars, being the biggest crime of the last fifty years, and everybody wanted to get in the newspaper story about it."
I'm pretty sure that if one could get photos of everyone entering/leaving police headquarters at around shift change times that one could probably convince a certain class of persons to invest in a system that used unsecured surveillance cams to track, say, whether any of the photographed are in an area where the investors might wish to transact some business.
What's good for the goose is good for the gander, and all that.
"Open source technical projects, and especially stupidly complex projects are probably not the best place to fight gender equality battles. Judge people on the basis of the diffs they submit. Anyone suitably competent will have a solid reputation before anyone actually knows their racial background, gender preferences etc. This is true equality."
That would only work, I think, if -- when making one's FIRST code contribution -- a random alphanumeric identifier were assigned by an automated system to every contributor, and ALL contributions were stripped of ANY content except a description of what the code was intended to be -- e.g.; "Print Driver: [CODE]". For recommendations of code replacement, the description, followed by the code to be replaced, a divider, and the new code and a Reg-style up/down vote system. No arguments pro or con allowed, no Torvaldsian invective allowed, no input of ANY sort allowed except the pure code on which to decide. This wouldn't solve the problem of girls/minorities being steered away from tech by societal pressures before they even GET to this point, but if your argument is that project members will pick the best code regardless of its source then obscuring the source shouldn't do anything but make the code stronger.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019