Is that supposed to be a rebuttal of what I said or what?
Is that supposed to be a rebuttal of what I said or what?
If you have to call friends and family instead of 911, then it is not life or death matter and nor truly an emergency.
You've never heard of rural areas or other such where it takes longer for the ambulance to get there than friends or family, have you? Especially when time is of the essence and every second counts? Also, knowing how occupied emergency services are I much prefer to get to the hospital on my own if I can. Oh, and being able to call your employer you're not going to be able to get to work? Calling your friends to come and take care of your pets? Calling your kids that you won't be able to come and pick them up? Letting your partner know that you won't be able to come home and he/she must be able to handle things on his/her own? There's PLENTY of reasons to have a cell phone.
Just the exact opposite of the way nature intended it.
Hardly. In nature there's plenty of homosexuality, especially so among bats and penguins, and they're not homosexual because we have made them that way; they are homosexual because, well, that's their nature. As such it must be seen that the nature "intended" for these races to experience both heterosexual and homosexual traits. (As if nature could actually intend anything. It's not a sentient entity.)
No (non-hermaphroditic) animal species an this planet would ever survive to evolve and live on if all of their members were gay.
And? What's that got to do with anything I said? I didn't advocate for everyone to suddenly turn gay, all I said was that _I_ enjoy making other girls squirm in pleasure. Feel free to be boring in your hetero-normative world-view.
Exactly what does a cell get you that you cann't live without?
Access to emergency services and to other people when you're not at home and something bad happens. Having been in such a situation multiple times atleast I refuse to go anywhere without a working cell phone.
If you're a woman, instead of pressing that reply button, why not just go make yourself useful and pleasure a man?
Pfft, why would I? Pleasing other women is a much more fun and useful use of my time!
Google Glass is no more augmenting reality than a TV set is.
If it were rendering also the view behind it so there was no loss of vision, then it would be augmented reality. As it is it's the same as if you strapped your cell phone on an arm attached to your head a foot out or so.
This may come as a surprise to you....but it's transparent.
Luckily, my wife never heard of
I'm not terribly fond of high-maintenance appliances.
Later on in the thread someone said that clearing NVRAM is enough to fix the brick, ie. either remove the NvRAM battery or otherwise prevent it from refreshing the NvRAM for 30 seconds and you're golden. Granted, that still requires opening up the whole laptop.
Wow, TFA is really glossing over an inherent limitation:
the "shiftability" of a Lytro image is a function of the width of the image sensor
If the goal of this is to produce useful stereo content that replicates the parallax seen by humans, then the image sensor needs to be at least as big as the average distance between two human pupils. That's roughly six centimeters. The Lytro's sensor is around six millimeters. Somehow I doubt they're going to increase their form factor by ten times in each dimension, and since the point of a Lytro is to avoid fancy lenses they can't bend the light path to compensate.
On a mobile phone 6cm would be a lot, but on a discrete camera -- let alone professional-level gear -- 6cm is nothing. Especially in filming 3D movies light-field cameras have enormous advantages over regular cameras, what with requiring less space to operate, no need to focus on anything during the filming as long as you just point in the correct direction, exceedingly easy conversion to regular 3D or 2D and so on. Heck, just being able to re-focus the image during post-processing would be enough of a selling point all by itself!
A. I freely chose to give them my money knowing that you cannot sell what you buy there
These limitations are not communicated well-enough to the general public. You and I knew perfectly-well what we were getting into, but in general people are still used to being able to loan stuff to their friends or giving away/selling their stuff when they're done with it, and Valve simply doesn't communicate these kinds of restrictions clearly. In addition to that, there are plenty of games that are sold in these usual DVD-jewel cases, but that on install inform that they require Steam to function -- you cannot skip Steam or you won't be able to play the game, and if you do install Steam the game will then forever-after be locked to your account; it's confusing for people that you set out and buy a physical object, but you can't then ever again give the object to someone else to enjoy of. It probably runs afoul of some first-sales laws here in Finland, too, but so far no one has challenged Valve's practices in court.
I personally have no stake in the matter as I have never sold my used games or given them away as I like to collect them, but this will also have ramifications for Ubisoft's UPlay and Electronic Arts's Origin and therefore I find this whole thing exceedingly interesting. The outcome will likely also affect Apple's App Store, Google's Play Market and Microsoft's Windows Store, so this could be the major consumer rights vs. corporation rights - battle of this decade.
Connectivity is great but I want automation.
That's what I thought, too. I want to have a hole in every room in which to throw my trash so that it is delivered to the basement and compacted. I want a delivery system that can bring me a 0.33l soda can whenever I press the button, and I want the same system to take the old, empty can back to the basement and store it. I can't really come up with anything other that I'd want automated. Maybe an automated lawn-mower, but those exist already.
and some bacon
I just tried bacon for the first time in my life a few weeks ago and jesus god damn christ was it horrible! Freakishly fatty and salty, no wonder people die to various kinds of heart diseases after eating that stuff o_o
If we go by how network security in various appliances has been applied this far a connected kitchen will be a time-bomb in the making. What if e.g. someone can turn your oven on at max while you're not at home? Or turn off your fridge, melting all your groceries there? Turn on the faucet and just let the water roll? Alas, if the recent history is any indication these things will have either no security or minimal security with hard-coded access tokens and unupgradeable firmware.
Suck it up. Seriously, are people today so pathetic that they can't go without playing some games?
99% of all the good games that are actually worth playing are DRM-encumbered.
EULAs have been challenged in courts multiple times here in Finland, every single time ending up in loss for the EULA-enforcer. The simple fact is that an EULA is covered by copyright laws, and copyright law cannot remove rights given by other laws. It most certainly is NOT covered by contract laws. That means that even if the EULA e.g. specifically said that you cannot sell the item after you're done with it the clause is invalid and you are perfectly within your rights to sell it.
the copyright still exists on the work, the ruling allows antigua to disregard the copyright and distribute the work. whoever recieves it cannot make more copies unless they want to be in violation of copyright law.
You didn't quite read what I said. If it worked like that then the work in question would have TWO copyrights on it, both equally legal -- the original one, and the new one. And obviously, copyright doesn't work if there are two legal copyrights to a work with differing terms. You see, the copyright asserted in Antigua would be just as legal because the copyright law is suspended and therefore the person with the work wouldn't have to abide by the terms like e.g. that you cannot assume ownership and rights to someone else's work. This is what I would like some legal expert to clarify: how to determine how to apply copyright to works that, in essence, are covered by two, competing copyrights.
If you can count your money, you don't have a billion dollars. -- J. Paul Getty