Section three of Article 7 of the Berne Convention states:

"(3) In the case of anonymous or pseudonymous works, the term of protection granted by this Convention shall expire fifty years after the work has been lawfully made available to the public. However, when the pseudonym adopted by the author leaves no doubt as to his identity, the term of protection shall be that provided in paragraph (1). If the author of an anonymous or pseudonymous work discloses his identity during the above-mentioned period, the term of protection applicable shall be that provided in paragraph (1). The countries of the Union shall not be required to protect anonymous or pseudonymous works in respect of which it is reasonable to presume that their author has been dead for fifty years."

Virtually everyone is a Berne Convention signatory; but actual implementation in domestic law has been both spottier and more...complex... than the convention text itself. It seems unlikely that something of clearly recent authorship would find itself presumed to be uncopyrighted merely because an author could not be found; but I'd imagine that, in practice, the more risk-averse would be very, very, jumpy about taking 'anonymous coward' at his word that they are authorized to use a given piece of code under the terms of whatever license, that he is even the author, and so forth. That might hinder adoption.

One would like to think so; but the courts haven't (CSS is how broken now, and for how long?) I assume that the argument is that it's 'effective' because you still need a specially designed tool to break it, not unlike a lockpick. What isn't clear, under that reasoning, is why essentially all file formats of remotely nontrivial complexity don't count as 'effective technological measures', since virtually nothing in digitized form is remotely human readable without specialized software transformation. Your odds of turning an RTMP stream into video with your brain are basically as good as your odds of doing the same with an RTMPE stream, and neither are high.

Capital-V "VALUE" is a purely mental abstraction, about which one can wax Platonic and ultimately empty; but the distinction between commodities or instruments with substantial utility (iron, aluminum, books, potatoes) and ones that are kept around mostly because they symbolize 'value' ($20 bills, gold, bitcoins) is arguably still relevant.

I don't entirely like the term 'intrinsic value', 'utility' might be closer; but some commodities are like D-list celebrities, who are famous primarily for their fame, and are valued primarily for their value, while others are valued because of the various purposes they serve. The lists overlap (gold, say, has a number of specialty applications in electronics; but would be extremely unlikely to command its present price if it had the same prestige as iron); but even when they do, the delta between the assigned value and the value in utility is usually pretty noticeable.

Were you transported by time-traveling mercantilists from somewhere in the mid 17th century?

Hmm... good thing that Real finance has honest, dependable, known, counterparties like AIG to keep risk in check!

(Please note, the above should not be construed as implicit endorsement of bitcoins; but merely an observation that so long as the rewards for gambling with other people's money are so good, people will find ways of doing risky things in basically any asset class.)

Everyone knows that 'willpower' is an intangible substance that some people possess more of, because they are better, and other people lack, because they are bad. I don't want to hear any more of this materialist nonsense. The rest of the universe may be causal; but human behavior isn't, because something!

Actually, getting hooked on prescription painkillers is frequently pretty similar to getting hooked on heroin, and a not terribly uncommon way to get started. Most of the painkillers worth bothering with are zesty opiates, the user's supply of which will dry up rather suddenly once their medical excuse and/or supply of flexible doctors does. Street opiates have purity issues, and aren't covered by insurance; but dealers can be more accommodating of non-prescription users.

Ok, sorry, Mexican cartels have convenient proximity to the US; but are, obviously, pretty willing to do business with anybody who has money and wants drugs.

Were you to poison the goods, you'd get a few dead drug mules and a somewhat interesting look at the cokeheads of most of the developed world. Happy now?

Depends on the type of radiation. Alpha decay can be dangerous (as with polonium, definitely not to be taken internally); but alpha particles are pitiful penetrators, so you'd see essentially nothing, even with a theoretically perfect detector, even a few meters, maybe tens of meters, away.

Beta rays penetrate better; but still aren't terribly punchy, and I'd be surprised if you could see much of anything from space. A low-flying survey aircraft, perhaps; but not orbit.

Gamma rays are attenuated by the atmosphere, though sometimes you can see the byproducts of those interactions, and some do get through, so that might be viable. No idea how good the resolution on contemporary gamma detectors is, though, trying to find a pinpoint dot against the background chatter of cosmic background and assorted minerals could be pretty hairy unless gamma detectors have resolution approaching that of visible light optics, and I'm not sure that they do.

ISO 21482 is pretty universal. Doesn't solve any of the nastier issues of cross-cultural-communication-without-shared-assumptions; but either that symbol, the old trefoil, or both, are about as iconic as warning labels get.

Now, as for this 'cobalt 60 in those drug shipments' concept, it might expose the mules (who tend to be low level and treated as expendable anyway) to enough radiation to kill them, slowly; but the major effect would be on the customers: ie. the coke-snorting Americans whining about them. You wouldn't be the first to suggest this... particular approach, the winning the war on drugs; but I bet you'd learn some interesting things about who does drugs once the casualties start to pile up.

I was thinking corporate machines. Some of the larger ones do have standard PSUs (possibly with rather eccentric wire bundles); but most of the smaller ones are mechanically total oddballs.

Well, there's a lot of it :) Do you have (links to) specific documents that you think are explicit?

Is the "individual" explicitly distinguished from a mobilisable citizen / reservist?

Which basically is what the Swiss army is, right ? Civilians with a military training than can be gathered / mobilized quickly when in need. If feel that he "established" distinction is only meaningful in the context of a modern state / army (as an example London police was established in 1829, replacing a "disorganized system of parish constables and watchmen").

My understanding is that the opposition is between states militias and federal standing army, not between civilians and either form of government. From Wikipedia, the amendment was basically written to please the anti-federalists.

There are a variety of possible sources of variation. And, since the part's (not illogical, if somewhat unhelpful for making firm predictions) thermal management strategy seems to be 'run as fast as possible; but don't die', those variations would show up in performance.

What I'd want to know (but am unlikely to find out) is whether AMD was actively misleading reviewers by sending them hand-picked especially good cards, or whether review cards come from the initial run, probably the one where AMD's people are mostly tightly and nervously observing the process, rather than the potentially more variable just-another-day-slapping-chips-on-cards production that follows.

Merely variation is only inconvenient, and may well mean that the usual 3rd-party overkill heatsinks actually help significantly. Actively misleading reviewers? Not So Good.

And battery - running the GPU harder sucks juice fast on Android phones.

Meanwhile, it wouldn't hurt to have a bit of a side conversation with someone in legal (for a start), then escalate it to formal conversations with them via email (again, print those suckers off) should nothing get resolved.

You don't have to approach them as if you are blowing the whistle on your boss. Just tell them you are concerned about your personal liability should you get caught breaking the law.