or we have the US justice system dealing peddling finally maybe getting near end of it's life?

I mean, prosecution/enforcement do deals all the time - while not asking the victims. heck, they let there be more victims to further their case in the dealing(of incarcerating maximum number of people). that's not justice - where is the justice for The Sun and Murdoch in the case, when the ringleader acted while under FBI leash to do something harmful against Murdoch - and the ringleader for that crime gets off from that crime, without asking the victim if it is ok.

well with facebook, gmail and other https sites.. the problem is really someone doing a man in the middle on the traffic outgoing from the tor exit point.

basically it just moves the point where the MITM might hapen, but, say, if you're in china then you might want to move that point to be outside of china.

wouldn't know about that before they ship, not under obligation to give gpl code before giving product having said code.

however, it might be unlikely for them to even have the board drivers etc to distribute as open source?

well.. from the looks of it..

the question should be to ask do they understand the difference between an INVENTION and a product.

clearly they had read about the invention way before and just hashed together a product. they don't seem to have clear understanding of how the product works.

basically they're just selling a 20$ box for 50$. which isn't too bad. but if they don't understand the product, why the fuck trust with them running it, instead of running tor on your laptop? or better yet, running something like tails on the laptop.. the tor wont help if the os on the laptop is the problem - and how they can vouch for the closed source drivers on the board? and if it's not their board, I doubt it's theirs to give away as "open hardware" either. it seems like it's open in the sense that they used whatever was openly available to them...

I think they just saw the project on hackaday, asked around for some boards and smelled money and wanted the money upfront from the customers to negate risks - and then did some bullshit to sell it. now that bullshit could technically be in violation of kickstarter rules, so they might have to move to indiegogo and spin up some more bullshit why they moved("big brother forced us to!" most probably).

well, not quite. any country can to a point control how other parts seem when viewed from their land.

however, it seems that US supporting multi stake is more like US opposing a new more level multi stake arrangement through some other entitity(un is a multi stake entity for example). US would rather that all the stakes are US stakes..

oh is that why projects with oracle certified people don't have huge cost overruns regularly?

who said the web protocols aren't "totally custom" in relation to other web protocols for sending a file to print?

now there's standards like bluetooth for printing that don't need driver, but suck for various reasons.

even still, the only time anyone I knew personally printed anything from a mobile device was over 10 years ago and that was in an electronics store, printing goatse over bluetooth to a printer on display.

so I don't really get it how mobile is the norm, most people print from some pc or another still - even connecting their mobile device to said pc to move the data they want to be printed.. because fck, whoever printed something as a message to a printer thats sitting at their home or girlfriends home? yet that's what is in the stupid adverts.

now let me tell you what is the real BREAKTHROUGH inkjet printing technology: hacked printheads with tubes for ink coming from external tanks. shit cheap per page! I can keep printing all day every day and it costs pennies! well it costs almost just the paper. and here in asia that sems to be the norm, everyone who buys an inkjet buys it with a hacked cart and ink reservoirs.

presumably.

or else you could maybe sue them for changing the contract retroeffectively? get your money back?

only locally.. like the windmills.

on the other hand.. windmills aren't cheap. not so sure about this leaked record, since actual market pricing doesn't really reflect it.

(also, go to finland and count how many skyscrapers you can find)

material science seems to be like spaghetti to the wall sometimes - but even the guys at 3m have some direction they're going to.

but other inventions, like the television - certainly not.

now. can the guy make another and can it be put to producing electricity? should be proof enough. if not, why the hell not?

"Hopefully one day a technically literate author will write a book which describes Telsa's work, but without all the hype and misdirection."

that would be really, really nice. all the tesla stuff lately seems laced so heavily with conspiracy and free energy shit that it's not enjoyable to read at all. youtube is filled with tesla free energy devices of which none work and plenty aren't even based on his work - they just put the title there for it to be cool

it did affect it somewhat. not by too much, but at least a lot of people knew that Uri was just full of shit.

and nowadays Uri has gone to saying that he is not psychic or posses supernatural powers - though it took a long time after the expose to end up at that.

and I don't get whats so unscientific about randis skepticism, somehow his critics always believe in some sort of another magic, be it tesla-magic, spirit-magic or whatever(and consequently one conspiracy or another) - and always like "oh but his real psychic/inventor I know doesn't need the money"(but somehow they always need money from normal schlobs/investors).

a better than "just remembered how palm" worked analogy would be: remembered how their own phones from 2005 worked and ported that to android BECAUSE WINDOWS PHONE IS TOO RESTRICTIVE in 2014...

that's the real joke. wp sucks to use for research.

if it works, they should have no problem just selling off energy?

how much energy should there be released from the transformation process to the end product? what they claim or not?

more probable that the textbook just fudged something. if it was about significant figures, the question should have stated that (and used different notation, but I'm unsure of how the american schooling teaches on that. then again, it's possible that it was "biblical math on meth" where anything goes if it's for gods word).

-lassi