Link to Original Source
Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!
We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).
Link to Original Source
Check the single-threaded performance - AMD is 50% faster than Intel.
(Not often you get to say that these days....)
Freedom of speech is the freedom to offend. Speech that offends no-one needs no protection.
It may be illegal to lie for gain, particularly for a corporation, depending on the precise details of the case. They're opening themselves up to criminal charges, not to mention civil lawsuits.
Like how people weren't bothered by Y2K bugs? Let's not repeat that every century.
Right. A more accurate headline would be
Well, it goes many ways to Sunday, but long story short this has potential uses. Just imagine if an extra on Stupid Franchise That Needs To Die VII could get it yanked if "I didn't expect a certain character to make any appearances" could be a valid argument. (Though I joke, misrepresentation of contract is legally dishonest but should have been a tort with the production team, not a DMCA claim with hosts. She should have taken it one rung up the ladder, so to speak - Google is "too late" in that process.)
This exactly. Its not that the actress doesn't have rights here, it's that the court affirmed the wrong rights. If the filmmaker materially misrepresented the film or the role in writing, that should be a fairly straightforward lawsuit.
Yes. Of all the plans floated so far (by either of the major parties over the past decade or more) this is the least worst.
There's a huge divide between you're wrong and you're not allowed to hold that opinion.
And you're on the wrong side.
Aha! The real reason why <> has been deprecated in favour of !=
I think a technical debunking of her claims of being hacked is ideal Slashdot material.
We don't have enough information yet. to properly analyse those claims. What I've seen written so far has been sensationalised and technically incoherent. That's reason enough to dismiss it, but not reason enough to consider it proven false.
Enough electricity to run 37 bowling alleys.
My solution is to not make up nonsensical claims in the first place.
It's not much of a solution, but it's mine.
No. More people are employed now than ever before, but most definitely not in the same jobs.