I can't really fault the TSA on this one topic; I can't even disagree with their logic. To you and I, it's a joke - but note the metal pressure chamber, which could contain anything, and the fibrous "fuse". You couldn't know for sure it wasn't functional unless you tried to light it. Similarly, I'm quite sure they don't allow the non-firing replica firearms you can easily buy - it just takes too long to positively determine these things ARE harmless replicas.
Honestly, this is getting to be like a Futurama episode, only that's supposed to be funny. People (myself included) occasionally point out there have been no declarations of war, but we forget we haven't defined war in this context. Presumably, it's whatever the government says it is - today. Hey, didn't we have a "war on poverty" for a while?
I know how to make better coffee, but there are certainly times my Keurig (actually, a Keurig-licensed Cuisinart) gets used. Zero to decent coffee in two minutes is nice, as is accommodating guests with varied preferences.
As for the DRM, it's not that it's complex or difficult, it's that pesky circumvention clause on the DMCA. THAT will have to be tested in the courts, but on the face of it, circumvention - by ANY means - is illegal.
"If the length of the cable doesn't matter, then maybe the number of people connected to a single antenna shouldn't matter either. If so, then no cable company anywhere should be paying retransmission fees."
Agreed. The first cable company that paid a fee to "directly" connect, instead of using an antenna, dragged us all down a slippery slope.
Originally all TiVo boxes had this capability; it's been slowly phased out and is now only available on the entry-level unit. To differentiate further, Aereo essentially rented you the antennas, whereas with TiVo you connect your own.
So not that similar at all; only thing is that both can record off the air for later viewing - just like a 1976 VCR.
Record 24/7 Download at the end of the shift. Camera not working, docked a days pay. No recording of an interaction, citizen's word automatically wins over the cop's. Guarantee they'll take the "life-or-death" split second.
The Australian cops didn't beat him. Why didn't they beat him after he was down? Everyone knows you have to beat them after they're down.
The lack of this report reminds me of when it was discovered that the local groundwater was heavily contaminated with MTBE from an abandoned gas station. The local water authority actually made an announcement saying the water was safe, because there were no federal standards for MTBE. If there were no standards, they couldn't be exceeding them, therefore there was no problem.
That's how I read it. The quoted text was poorly framed; the less idiotic version would be to prohibit "reproduction from memory." The scary thing is, there just might have been a legal reason to word it the way they did.
" The equipment was long ago sold to the DOD. Perhaps someone more enlightened might be able to explain how the original seller receives income when the DOD gives away surplus equipment to domestic groups."
I realize your position in the industry doesn't allow you to see this, but it's very simple: The fact that some of the equipment is BRAND NEW indicates it was never needed for it's original purpose. Passing it along to local law enforcement allows the excessive purchasing to continue, rather than motivate the Feds not to buy it in the first place.
Oops, let me sign in this time. That was my comment, and was intended mostly as sarcasm. I'll have to be a bit broader next time. Though I must admit, if someone HAS to own the image, the man is a better candidate than the monkey.
There are two living entities involved in creating this image. One isn't legally a person, and can't hold copyright. That leaves ONE entity.
The article's assertion the image belongs to no one or to everyone might make sense in a ideal world of pure philosophy, but we don't live in that world. Everything of even theoretical value has to belong to SOMEONE, and Mr. Slater is the best candidate.
Laws? Laws are interpreted and re-interpreted all he time. There just hasn't been precedent set for this circumstance yet. I'm guessing there will be.
(You, in the back! A question?) Yes, I am a former professional photographer. Why?
Make it a real, literal fast lane. Say you pay for 25 Mbps; you get that PLUS whatever is routed through the fast lane. Netflix wants (and pays for) 5, you get a total of 30. If you're watching two movies in different rooms, you get 35. Heck, put the signal through two different physical wires, if need be...
Why, of course, the people don't want war. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy or a fascist dictatorship or a Parliament or a Communist dictatorship. The people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country.
Duh; of course. However, I said something along those lines to the girlfriend the other day. She told me not to be ridiculous; they can't exclude pre-existing conditions from health insurance anymore, and that makes it worth it!