Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: But all downloadable content is locked to console! (Score 3, Interesting) 109

by Myrv (#42172815) Attached to: Cheap Indie Games Make Wii U a Better Value

Just like the Wii, the Wii U locks all downloadable content to the console, not the account. So if your console breaks, is lost, or stolen have fun re-buying all that content. You also can't use your network ID on another console. Want to play that game you bought on your friends machine? Tough, not possible.

This is the main reason I refuse to buy any more Nintendo consoles. It's also the number one reason I regret buying my Wii as well. In my mind, until they fix this, online content actually reduces the value of a Nintendo console.

Comment: Re:This clearly goes against the ruling (Score 1) 413

by Myrv (#41781333) Attached to: Apple Posts Non-Apology To Samsung

The required content of the notice was clearly given. Adding stuff before or after the specified content changes the notice from what was specified. If they wanted to post a second ad/webpage giving their point of view they were well within their rights to do so. But by combining the two into one they didn't fulfill the order. The order states the material part of the notice should contain the "apology". One can hardly claim the material part of Apple's notice was the prescribed message. You have 2 lines of text followed by 5 paragraphs denigrating them. The material part of the notice is no longer the prescribed text so they didn't satisfy the order.

Comment: This clearly goes against the ruling (Score 5, Insightful) 413

by Myrv (#41778127) Attached to: Apple Posts Non-Apology To Samsung

The judges ruling clearly states:

As a result of his second judgment, Judge Birss ordered that:

        Within seven days of the date of this Order [18th July 2012] [Apple] shall at its own expense (a) post in a font size no smaller than Arial 11pt the notice specified in Schedule 1 to this order on the homepage of its UK website ... as specified in Schedule 1 to this Order, together with a hyperlink to the Judgment of HHJ Birss QC dated 9th July 2012, said notice and hyperlink to remain displayed on [Apple's] websites for a period of six months from the date of this order or until further order of the Court (b) publish in a font size no smaller than Arial 14pt the notice specified in Schedule 1 to this Order on a page earlier than page 6 in the Financial Times, the Daily Mail, The Guardian, Mobile Magazine and T3 magazine.

And

The material part of the notice specified in Schedule 1 reads:

        On 9th July 2012 the High Court of Justice of England and Wales ruled that Samsung Electronic (UK) Limited's Galaxy Tablet Computer, namely the Galaxy Tab 10.1, Tab 8.9 and Tab 7.7 do not infringe Apple's registered design No. 0000181607-0001. A copy of the full judgment of the High court is available on the following link [link given]

The judge specifically spelled out what Apple was suppose to post. Apple didn't follow these instruction by attaching all the other cruft to the ad therefore they haven't fulfilled the court order.

Comment: Re:Alastair Reynolds (Score 1) 1130

by Myrv (#40932761) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: Most Underappreciated Sci-Fi Writer?

I did the same thing. I picked it up browsing the shelves and there was absolutely nothing on the book suggesting it was the third of a series. Slogging through the first hundred pages was a little painful and I eventually came to the conclusion there must be previous books but by then I was on the road and had pieced together enough of the back story that I just pushed through and finished it. In a way I think that made the somewhat abrupt resolution to the Inhibitors a bit more palatable. If I had invested in two other books about the war against the Inhibitors I may have been a little more miffed at the resolution. As such I've had no desire to read the previous books so can't comment on the. Gap though was well written.

Networking

+ - Cisco says, "All your Routers are Belong to Us"-> 1

Submitted by Myrv
Myrv (305480) writes "Reports have starting popping up that Cisco is pushing out and automatically (without permission) installing their new Cloud Connect firmware on consumer routers. The new firmware removes the users ability to login and administer the router locally. You now must configure the router using Cisco's Cloud connect service. If that wasn't bad enough the fine print for this new service allows Cisco to track your complete internet history. Currently it appears the only way to disable the Cloud Connect service is to unplug your from the internet."
Link to Original Source

Comment: Strange you should mention proximity sensors.... (Score 2) 988

by Myrv (#37794734) Attached to: Jobs Wanted To Destroy Android

In a far off, seldom visited corner of my companies campus is a wall of patents granted over the years. A few weeks ago I found myself browsing them and noticed one of them was for a proximity sensor on a phone. In this case it was designed to automatically switch the phone from normal mode to speaker phone depending on proximity but it doesn't take a genius to see other uses for this. It was granted in 1998. Apple "steals" from other companies just as much as they claim people steal from them.

Comment: Re:Really? (Score 1) 314

by Myrv (#37291442) Attached to: Starz To Pull Content From Netflix

Just like you can get a car second hand, you can get a Disney movie on DVD (new or used, or rented).

But you can't watch them via a streamed connection as the case against Zediva has shown. Zediva bought individual discs and streamed them on a one-to-one basis to users. For all intents the user had rented a real physical disc but because it was streamed over a network the courts deemed it a violation of copyright. So no, streaming companies cannot just buy used or new discs from just anyone. This would be the same as requiring all used car lots to buy their cars from the licensed dealer (no car auctions, no trade-ins, no private purchases).

Comment: Re:Time for a serious effort on renewables (Score 2) 964

by Myrv (#35639976) Attached to: Americans Favor Moratorium On New Nuclear Reactors

Also, in an emergency, a CANDU, which uses heavy water, can't be cooled and moderated using sea water like in Fukushima

Nonsense, the heavy water actually promotes the reaction (it's a neutron moderator). Getting rid of it and cooling with normal fresh or sea water would be doable and simply serve the double role of cooling AND stopping the chain reaction (by virtue of not being heavy water).

Comment: Re:Time for a serious effort on renewables (Score 2) 964

by Myrv (#35639924) Attached to: Americans Favor Moratorium On New Nuclear Reactors

It's even safer than that. The primary purpose of heavy water in a CANDU reactor is not to cool, but to act as a neutron moderator (it slows the neutrons down). Without this moderator the reaction stops (CANDU reactors do not use enriched uranium so neutron moderation is required to keep the chain reaction going). In addition to control rods CANDU reactor support either moderator poisoning (they inject chemicals into the moderator tank that absorb neutrons bringing the reaction to an end) or a moderator dump (they actually dump the heavy water from the moderator tank). This coupled with the non-enriched uranium just makes them plain safer. It's a shame they didn't sell more of them.

Comment: Re:Damn you, George W. Bush! (Score 1) 293

by Myrv (#35466796) Attached to: US Judge Orders Twitter To Give Up WikiLeaks Data

In 2009 and again in 2011, congress passed laws blocking the transfer of prisoners from the Guantanamo Bay detention facility. They were part of omnibus spending bills, so refusing to sign them would have been a disaster. I don't know what you expected Obama to do, short of declaring himself emperor and ruling by decree.

Actually no, congress didn't outright block the transfer of prisoners from Guantanamo. They simply imposed conditions (admittedly excessive ones) that needed to be met before the transfer could be made (unless I missed something). From the bill (section 9011) I know of we have:

(d) The President shall submit to Congress, in classified form, a plan regarding the proposed disposition of any individual covered by subsection (c) who is detained as of June 24, 2009. Such plan shall include, at a minimum, each of the following for each such individual:

        (1) A determination of the risk that the individual might instigate an act of terrorism within the continental United States, Alaska, Hawaii, the District of Columbia, or the United States territories if the individual were so transferred.
        (2) A determination of the risk that the individual might advocate, coerce, or incite violent extremism, ideologically motivated criminal activity, or acts of terrorism, among inmate populations at incarceration facilities within the continental United States, Alaska, Hawaii, the District of Columbia, or the United States territories if the individual were transferred to such a facility.
        (3) The costs associated with transferring the individual in question.
        (4) The legal rationale and associated court demands for transfer.
        (5) A plan for mitigation of any risks described in paragraphs (1), (2), and (7).
        (6) A copy of a notification to the Governor of the State to which the individual will be transferred, to the Mayor of the District of Columbia if the individual will be transferred to the District of Columbia, or to any United States territories with a certification by the Attorney General of the United States in classified form at least 14 days prior to such transfer (together with supporting documentation and justification) that the individual poses little or no security risk to the United States.
        (7) An assessment of any risk to the national security of the United States or its citizens, including members of the Armed Services of the United States, that is posed by such transfer and the actions taken to mitigate such risk.

Yes, it's a lot of paper work (there's further notifications required 15 days prior to moving) but none of it is impossible. Also note, at no point does it require further approval of congress. Once the paperwork is submitted the President is good to go. Now admittedly, if he did try this congress would likely try to introduce a new bill blocking it (thus the 45 day notice) but hey, he could veto that one specifically unless overruled by congress in which case it really isn't his fault anymore. But he hasn't. The only thing stopping him at this point is paperwork. No law or specific prohibition from congress is doing it. And that is the disgraceful part of it.

He: Let's end it all, bequeathin' our brains to science. She: What?!? Science got enough trouble with their OWN brains. -- Walt Kelly

Working...