What he is talking about is DIVX (all caps), named to make people think of the OTHER DivX , which was an attempt at "DRM in a box" that went over about as well as a loud ripping fart in an elevator.
I predict other than the *philes (the same folks that bought Beta, Laserdisc, and anything else that claimed to be "better" than the rest) 4K is gonna flop as bad as 3D TV, the reasons why are numerous, 1.- DVD is "good enough" for the majority, which is why after all these years BD is still not a blip compared to the massive DVD install base, 2.- The bandwidth in the USA to stream 4K without getting capped? EXTREMELY rare, most folks would be lucky to be able to watch 2 vids before they get capped, 3.- The not insignificant investment from users that really like what 1080p looks like now, and 4.- The fact it won't work with anything they already have, thus causing the "I gotta buy the Beatles albums again" syndrome which in a "jobless recovery" isn't gonna fly.
Considering the majority of PCs still don't come with BD? I'm really not worried about 4K DRM, it'll be another WMA, only bitch is the wasted die space used by your GPU and/or board for this shit you'll never use. Damn, now I'm gonna have to grab that R9 270x before they have time to add that shit.
RMS himself has said that he would only be okay with getting rid of copyright (and hence the basis on which GPL and its copyleft protection stands), if copyleft itself is written into law - i.e. if redistributing binaries without access to the code becomes illegal.
Uhhhh...yeah dude? The post he is referring to used "compartmentalized", "intrinsic" and "homogeneous" in less than 3 sentences....normal folks and IT guys? yeah they don't talk like that. So the poster is either 1.- A shill, or 2.- Works in PR or marketing, because those guys DO talk like that.
Frankly I was shocked he didn't roll out "synergy" but I think they wised onto it thanks to Dilbert ragging on it so many times.
It's not a war when the other government doesn't mind you being there.
Really? So Vietnam war wasn't a war, and neither was the Soviet war in Afghanistan?
I have a very simple definition of war. If you have a "legitimate military operation" with "legitimate military objectives", then guess what, it's a war.
If you have already swallowed the Apple BS so much that you REQUIRE everything from iTunes to Apple formats and iWhatever support? Then go ahead and go full Cult 'o Mac and buy a damned Macbook already!
As I tell every customer that asks about Apple anything? Be ready to go full Apple or go home. iTunes for Windows sucks, it has ALWAYS sucked, it always WILL suck, so if you are gonna go retard? Go full retard, just buy a damned macbook and stop trying to make that shitastic software work on Windows. Fuck I've seen DOS games that work better on Windows 7 than fricking iTunes, that POS software is either gimped on purpose (to again push the full Cult 'o Mac) or they hired the absolute cheapest third world rent-a-coders they possibly could to work on the Windows version. Either way it blows ass, it always has, always will. So stop coming up with more and more excuses that will require that shitfart iTunes and just go full Cult o' Mac already!
What I find ironic as hell is the war hawks pushing this crap do not realize they are causing the US military to fall into the same trap the axis did in WWII. Spend all your money on "wonder weapons" that cost so much only a handful can be built and are so prone to breakdown and malfunction that only a small percentage of that small handful will be available at any 1 time, meanwhile any potential enemy can go pick up a fleet of Russian fourth and fifth gen planes for the cost of one of ours.
I don't care how "high tech" you make the F35 if you put 1 F35 against 20+ MiG29 or SU35? Its going down. As Stalin is reported to have said "Quantity has a quality all its own".
And BOTH sides get royally fucked to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars because America has NO limits on how much drug companies can charge and NO law stating the government should be required to buy any and all drugs that the state makes a requirement.
Before everybody here breaks their arms clapping? Might want to remember you are handing big pharma, one of the biggest sources of bribery we have in the USA, a mandated right to print money. If you want the children across the country to be forced to get these shots? Then DEMAND that the state have the patents NOT big pharma.
Oh and FYI for those that don't know when things do go wrong and some kid gets sick (as there is NO DRUG that is 100% safe, even aspirin kills a small percentage of users each year) guess who picks up the tab? Its YOU, as the big pharma lobby got a bill passed in the 90s requiring the government (aka YOU) to pick up the tab and absolve them of any and all responsibility. Must be nice to be able to privatize all the profits while wiping away any liabilities, huh?
Just as we can compel you to pay your income tax by force if needed, so we can compel you to get yourself vaccinated. You can protest as much as you want, and you're welcome to "fight us to the death", but judging by the fact that you're still alive, it seems that you have diligently filed your tax returns so far, so I'm going to file it as "just talk".
You don't have a right to not catch diseases from infected people.
In my state, knowingly spreading disease (e.g. by going to the crowds) if you know that you're infected is against the law.
People do have a right to not submit themselves to injections they don't agree with.
No-one has an absolute right to anything. All rights are ultimately balanced against the good of society. That's why free speech does not preclude libel & slander laws, for example, and why RKBA doesn't mean that you have a right to own a cruise missile.
In this particular case, your right to control your body is overridden by the extreme degree of common good that results from mandatory vaccinations, combined with a very low degree of personal invasion that such a vaccination actually entails.
Uhhhh....its the same thing Google does with ChromeOS only unlike ChromeOS its OPTIONAL and can be turned off. I seriously doubt it will even be on by default for any SKU other than Windows Enterprise as it would mean a ton of headaches for any OEM that sold a PC with this on thanks to the increased support calls.
Don't you just love how whatever MSFT does its automatically evil, even when its just copying Slashdot darling Google? It doesn't matter that Nadella is nothing like Gates or Ballmer, that one of the first things he did was open up
This CEO change so far looks to be as big a direction shift for MSFT as bringing Jobs back was for Apple, as he doesn't seem to give a shit about planting Winflags on everything (like Ballmer) or treating FOSS like the plague and fucking users in favor of getting snugly with the OEMs (ala Gates) but actually seems to be LISTENING TO THE USERS and giving us what we ask for...shouldn't we at least give the guy one OS launch to see what he's gonna do?
Dude you might want to look up "Intel SSD killswitch" as you do NOT want an Intel SSD, as instead of doing the logical solution if one finds failing sectors (which would be alert the user and turn it into a WORM drive so they can get their data off) Intel SSDs throw a killswitch and on next boot your drive and all your data is trashed as Intel's killswitch kills the drive....no matter how many good sectors you have left!
I would take the cheapest OCZ or Kingston before I would EVER touch an Intel SSD, that killswitch shows they have not a single fuck to give about the customers, its all about killing the drive the second the sectors start going, probably to increase sales. Anyway you slice it its seriously douchebag behavior and NOT a position you want to support with your wallet!
Even a quick search violates your privacy rights. The question is what exactly is "reasonable suspicion". It can't just be a hunch, they have to have some tangible evidence for that.
How is that any different than an X-ray/millimeter-wave/infrared device being used to determine the contents of the vehicles?
The basic idea there is that the dog can't tell anything other than whether you have drugs or not, and 4A is not deemed to be applicable to your criminal activity (i.e. you don't have the right to privacy to evidence of the crime). The reason why your right to privacy is violated in a regular warrantless search is because of all the other things that cops get to see that aren't related to a crime. But if they have a magic device that can only detect evidence and not anything else, then that doesn't affect anything other than evidence and hence is not an infringement. Cops claim that drug-sniffing dogs are such devices.