Re: nearly $1000
My girlfriends wouldn't be impressed if they were f***ing in a car that cheap :-)
521 publicly visible posts • joined 10 Sep 2009
They're unlikely to have any option because otherwise every eBay trader and his dog will enter the phone import business otherwise.
The mobile phone market may be sewn up between a few manufacturers, but it is a very fickle market. HTC are declining rapidly, Nokia are certainly no longer the dominant power, Samsung are having difficulties against Chinese competition which is nimble and getting closer to offering competive products at good prices etc.
The problem with large meat eaters is that they require a lot of ground to survive on each.
I would have suggested that this thing would be much more vulnerable to a smaller pack animal; whatever the dinosaur equivalent of a hyena is. Sure there would be a few injuries taking it down, but all the smaller animals have to do is severely injure it and then wait for infection to do the rest.
The original claim for Fermats Last Theorem was that he had produced a " I have discovered a truly marvellous proof of this, which this margin is too narrow to contain".
Andrew Wiles proof runs to around 150 pages of very complex math, and shows that Fermat was likely to have been incorrect in his statement, which I think is what the OP was was referrring to
I'm not convinced Ukraine is a shining beacon of light either. Politics in Ukraine appears to be a very dirty business.
I am of the view that Ukraines troubles stem from the fact that it has an East/West divide in its population, and the election of its leaders follows that divide. The Eastern population saw the "popular uprising" to remove a president who was from their faction as illegal, and personally I agree with them.
Whilst I think that Putin has some very unclean hands in the matter, I do think that Russia has a fair case that supporters of a close association with Russia have been treated unfairly. On the other hand, appropriating territory from the Ukraine is not the answer.
I am in favour of you sending your probe into space, but it seems you were a little unclear as to why you have to go to the US for your junket^H^H^H spaceplane launch. You already stated that the French and Dutch had been helpful, so why not sip some Beaujolais or Moet as your spherical object takes your probe to places no one has been before?
In the case you are quoting a very significant element of the case was that at least one of the people who she'd had an intimate relationship with was under 16 when she was 19. Also when initially arrested, it was assumed she was male and the actual arrest was for sexual assault on the assumption she was a guy.
In other words this was a sexual assault case and the gender of the offender had little to do with it.
Or by virtue of fraud, raping women protesters and fathering children by them
I think if you accepted this one, you would be on a very slippery slope indeed. It would mean that every white lie anyone ever tells to have sex could be brought up against you later, ranging from shaving or adding a few years here and there, to exaggerating the size of your penis, job importance, wealth or whatever. You consent to sex if you like the person you are with, regardless of his/her job title.
Your cynical points about all the others have validity though
The person who set the camera up has framed the area that is taken and in addition starts and stops the taking of pictures. There is however legislation about what CCTV can and can't be used for though. e.g. if it is for security in a private venue, you can't see the pictures of a supermodel having a passionate snog with a random bloke in there.
...a human did press the shutter in the sense that he guided the satellite camera to the exact location and circumstances where the shot was taken.
Author is a strange word but the intent is to convey how much control you had over the circumstances of the production of the work. The photographer had little to none in this case.
The monkey selfie one could probably have been solved by leaving the camera taking frames at 30 or 60fps and then passing it to the monkey instead of having the monkey control the exact circumstances of when the shutter button was pressed.
I'd like a banana and a job as Official Legal Counsel to The Register please!
http://forums.theregister.co.uk/forum/containing/2265376
http://forums.theregister.co.uk/forum/containing/2266466
http://forums.theregister.co.uk/forum/containing/2266470
http://forums.theregister.co.uk/forum/containing/2266569
http://forums.theregister.co.uk/forum/containing/2267528
I'm now off the The Torygraph and The Daily Hate to express my smugness there too.
There's an adage about someone ha d a car breakdown, and a mechanic came out, worked out the symptoms and then said to the owner "that'll be £200, please".
"£200" goes the owner. "Thats ridiculous!". I want an invoice in writing with a breakdown of why I'm being charged so much.
So later he gets the breakdown:
Labour charge: 10 mins - £20
Knowing where to deploy hammer - £180
...that because of this agreement Apple was able to save billions of dollars, obtain and hold the staff it wanted and therefore report increased profits which would reflect in an increased share price. The settlement will be for peanuts (if you call a couple of hundred million peanuts) and therefore a reasonable return on its dodgy activity.
There appears to be a series of tables with T-700/705 model numbers and some with T-320/325
Are some Galaxy Tab Pro whilst others are Galaxy Tab S.
Whats the difference?
Update: I think I've just self edumacated myself - see http://www.cnet.com/uk/news/samsung-galaxy-tab-vs-note-vs-pro/
I don't really want my tablet or phone to get any thinner. My hand wants to hold a device with a feeling of solidity, not something that may break or bend to easily.
If they have the ability, I do want my tablet or phone to last the better part of a week before needing a recharge. If their system runs on 1/4 of the power that the previous generation did, then I'll take the increase between recharges rather than shrinking my tool...
You're confusing "ownership" with "entitled to copyright protection". The two are entirely different matters, and US copyright law explicitly states that if your work was not authored by a human, you can't get copyright.
Any law that states you can invent a cure for cancer and get 14 years protection on it, and yet can take a photo of a monkey and be protected for 90 years or so is highly insane. About 15-20 years for both would be enough.
According to US law, works not authored by humans are not eligible for copyright protection. Children, as they are human, are eligible for copyright protection of their works - there is no age limit.
See http://www.copyrightcompendium.com/#503, especially 503.03(a) Works-not originated by a human author.
So Terry Pratchett's librarian had better campaign for a change in the law before he writes his memoirs!
Yes, US law would likely be the only one that matters since both the Buenos Aires and Berne Conventions recognise the law of the shorter term. In the US copyright regulations clearly state that copyright cannot be obtained on non-human works and therefore the duration of any copyright in the US is zero.
Wikimedia would just reply with a counter-notice reiterating their belief that the image is public domain and you would be back to square one where the matter would have to be decided in a court of law.
Although it does sound strange, WIkimedia have an arguable case that since the monkey was the author and non-human works do not qualify for copyright protection, it is public domain. [I'm not saying they would win a case, but being backed by the legislation is a good starting point :-) ]
Lets assume for this argument that the original photo image file as taken by the monkey qualifies for public domain status.
Unless the contribution to the derivative work as posted on Wikimedia was significant, it remains in the public domain. A small amount of rotation, some cropping and a slight tweaking of the color balance would not qualify.as significant and even then only those specific derivative changes would be protected.
When challenging my IP qualifications, its a good idea to show me yours before I show mine. :-)
However, I said it was an arguable case - I didn't say anything about my IP qualifications, nor did I say that the argument I was making was guaranteed to win. However since I was a joint author of DeCSS (see bottom of http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/DeCSS/Kesden/index.html) I did get some exposure to US Copyright law.
The requirement for a human author to be eligible for Copyright registration can be found in S.503.03 ("Works not capable of supporting a copyright claim.") of the regulations. The section on copyright.gov is down but there is a copy on copyright compendium (http://www.copyrightcompendium.com/#503). Read the section 503.03(a) Works-not originated by a human author.- the title alone should be a big enough clue.
I realise somebody has to get it going, but I'd regard paying in Bitcoin as a poor way of doing business at the moment. After a few recent knocks pushing the price down, I suspect the next Bitcoin movement will be substantially upwards over the next year, so those servers cost you substantially more than $50k