dedward

Legal if the building is constructed such that the radio signals required cannot get in or out due to the materials used, like a giant farraday cage.

The FCC does not have the authority to stop you from doing that.

Their authority is in the area of regulating who can USE the airwaves.... they regulate who can broadcast, and how.

And in this case, they are saying that building a device that actively transmits with the intention of preventing other devices from working is illegal.

Private property is irrelevant - the airwaves are public.

Thinking about how our eyes really work - you don't need the same resolution. You only need proper eye tracking and the right amount of resolution in the center of your vision (or wherever). You only need it to render what you are looking at - I'm sitting about 2 feet away from a 27 inch screen.... I'm never looking at the entire thing in such a way that I need all that detail at every point. Sure, I need it to be there when my eyes dart around... but as long as that's done, it will look just as real.

Given something more adaptive, there's no reason you couldn't have a ginormous holographic wraparound workspace... or whatever your imagination can come up with.

Right - but let's say they get less dorky and more comfortable - and really do have the visual quality we really want - objects look solid and real.

That seems much more useful than a VR that you have to plug out of the real world and immerse yourself in - at least for collaboration with others on real world things... like the example with the motorbike design.

No need to fake it... if you can get the retinal projection accurate enough, with fast enough eye tracking, the depth is as real as anything else you'll see in real life...the goal would be to have it feel completely natural.

The question said "AI" - not "self-aware consciousness"

When it's -100 outside, you get used to it.

Explain what you are doing and why; if they don't want to let you try it, then you aren't interested in buying it. It's understandable that, out of ignorance, they aren't comfortable letting you do that... it's equally understandable that you wouldn't pay thousands of dollars for something you can't even play with for a few minutes in the store first.

Right.

The point I'm making is that this isn't simply that "there isn't anything in our current geo-political makeup where enough countries meet to disprove the theorem"... the theorem holds up under any theoretical design.

I was under the impression corners don't matter... it's about borders, not corners. Draw any kind of map you like, you only need four colours.

In that great expanse and time, there may also have been ample time for civilizations to rise, then fall. We might have just missed them on such grand scales. Nobody says we'll be hanging around for a billion years trying to communicate with others... if we even last that long.

I don't mean to be "that guy"... because this is, of course, about linux running 4k.

But much of the discussion seems to be around what the point is, whether it's useful, and so on.

As someone who's been using one of the new 5k iMacs since it came out (so that's 5120x2880 in a 26" display)... let me add a bit, hopefully without sounding like an apple fanboy.

First - running it at actual 5k, rather than at 3200 or 2560 HiDPI, is crystal clear, amazingly sharp, but too small at this size. With a 40" display it would be perfect, I imagine. At full 5k, you can fit an amazing amount of stuff on a single screen, and it's handy for certain short troubleshooting sessions - but stuff can be so small it's straining. The stuff is still crisp though, if you can manage to focus on it. The detail is there. 12 point fonts are barely readable to my 40 year old eyes unless I get closer.

3k is just fine, and 2k is what you'd expect - but both are using HiDPI rendering and you get stunningly crisp fonts and detailed images and whatnot.

I wouldn't trade it for anything, even if I don't run in 5k all day long.

They will be doing this as a statement against the use of their work in this manner, and for the publicity that statement generates.

It's very unlikely they actually think "Hey, we have had our copyright violated and deserve compensation."

This isn't a money grab, that's not their style.

That would be decoding, not encoding.

With enough size and resolution, it really doesn't matter. After all, you can always use the space for something, right?

I recently upgrade to a 5k imac... and it's an absurd amount of space. I don't see the point in griping about aspect ratio when it's merely size and density that we really want.

All the extra stuff ZFS does, and does performantly, comes at a cost. That's the cost (I can't vouch for the amount.. but the principle is right. CPU power matters too.)

You don't get all those features for free... but you do get them.

This should be fairly obvious...

ZFS has it's own requirements... to work well it needs lots of resources (cpu/ram) and EEC memory.

If you have those, then sure, it gives you many advantages.

If you don't, then you are opening yourself up for struggle.

Before anyone gets too far in - that's just a preview, there are a about 60 pages cut out of the middle.

In this case I read that purely as saying "It's okay for there to be contradictions - life really is that way, even if you look at science."

You can still fleece them, you can still demand they use yours, you can still try all kinds of stuff.

You just can't actively jam their use of that spectrum.

Keep in mind the FCC isn't regulating the specifics of the WIFI protocols.. just the use of the spectrum.

It's not a technical limitation on a certain type of packets, but about the results.

The problem is only when the end result is that you are deliberately stopping other people from making valid use of the spectrum.

There are valid cases for doing what they are doing (preventing spoofing).. this just wasn't one of those valid use cases.

There really isn't a slippery slope argument to be made.. they already have that power.

If they determine you are deliberately interfering with lawful use of the airwaves, it doesn't matter how you are doing it.

And very likely.. that act of "forcing them to disassociate" would count as interference... and be rather illegal if it went to court.

They have no authority to be able to interfere with your use of spectrum, just as you have none to interfere with theirs.

The distinction doesn't mean anything though. In both cases it is up to the FCC to regulate usage, not you, or a hotel, or a conference organizer.

It's not their spectrum to manage, and everyone else has just as much right to use it as they do, event or no event.

Deliberate interference of the legal use of the airwaves by others is flat out illegal.

That's not cheating..... it's a perfectly fine, perfectely efficient way for the casino to make money.

If you are splitting your bets among players to get around table limits, they might frown on that - but that's not because you are "winning" it's because you are circumventing their table limits.

FYI - that disassemble feature is part of the CL spec - it's not unique to SBCL.

http://www.lispworks.com/documentation/HyperSpec/Body/f_disa...

Color me naieve here.....

Some signed some kind of agreement with amazon, has tens of thousands of items in their warehouses, and is running a business where amazon is basically responsible for everything.

Amazon decides to drop them.

The reasoning sounds unfair, but this business is unable or unwilling to pay for lawyers, and didn't consider what would happen in the event the relationship ended and there was still stock in the warehouse?

That sounds like a failure on the part of the seller to me.

There is a case to be made with these situations that you weren't actually asleep.. you just didn't lay down memories for the period of time, because nothing happened.

You feel like time is missing because you have no recollection of that time - but that does not have to equate to you not being awake, or able to respond.

And it likely won't.. at least not without giving up the ability to work over high latency/lossy connections properly.

The reason mosh shows you current-state rather than playing catch up with every byte transmitted by the terminal is very deliberate, and desired.

The ability to detach and re-attach to screen has been there since day one... that's probably one of the largest reasons most people use it. Terminal software these days can handle multiple sessions just fine - the benefit is being able to detach and re-attach.

Multiple terminals in one session was more critical back when we were using dumb terminals and whatnot - where you couldn't multiplex locally.

While the situation you describe is one that some people end up using it for - it's not the real reason mosh is useful.

Where mosh really shines is when your IP is changing too frequently (a mobile problem when you are on the move) and when you are dealing with high latency connections.

When you have to ssh in somewhere over a shitty, barely working mobile data connection - mosh is a lifesaver. It makes an otherwise unusable situation comfortable and productive.

Sure, it's handy for jumping between connections, on/off wifi and so on - but that's easy to achieve many other ways with tools that have been around for a decade or two at this point.