I still wish they would clarify the language in their ads. When they say 'everything attached to your computer, all your external and internal drives completely unlimited for $5/month" they really should clarify they have no way to back up a NAS device.
The Do Not Call database in the US has never been effective because the type of company making these spammy calls doesn't care if they are breaking the law. There is no enforcement effort to track them down.
Do you remember what things were like before the Do Not Call database? We would get one or more marketing calls a day on our home phone (landline). These days, maybe once a month.
I've been on it for years as well as the DNC database for caregivers of elderly patients with diminished capacity and I receive more than 5 calls per day.
It's exactly the same situation with the Telephone Preference Service in the UK in my experience. The only way I've managed to get these calls to stop is to get withheld numbers (ie callers with no or blocked Call ID) blocked at the phone company level - which usually incurs a monthly fee, of course...
What is the power limit of POE? I don't see a reason to try to dim LEDs on AC or a reason to keep converting DC/AC/DC/AC so often. Wouldn't POE or a similar standard be better?
"So there’s a few things at play here. For context, I run the Product Security team at Tesla and I’m safety-trained on the HV systems - I’m also working hands-on with a small drive inverter on a hobby project right now.
First and foremost, our large drive unit pulls about 1000A at full load, and switching that with silicon is tough. We use a bank of custom IGBTs on each of the high/low sides of each of the 3 rotor phases in order to handle the power, and that’s with active fluid cooling. You can switch that much current with silicon but it ain’t cheap, and you’ll need either active cooling or a bunch of thermal mass if you want the thing to switch more than once. http://www.teslamotorsclub.com/attachment.php... is a decent pic, the object on the left is a single-phase switch, you can see 6x transistors laying flat at the front for one side of the phase (the other bank is behind).
Secondly, Model S is an AC induction motor so the current through the winding ramps up more-or-less linearly over time until the phase switches off (or changes direction). You’re at high power but you’re not switching the load at zero-crossing as you would in a resonant load such as a Tesla coil, instead you have to switch at an increasing current depending on how much power you want to the wheels. You now don’t just have to switch a lot of power, you have to switch it FAST so that the resistive losses in the FETs don’t blow out the power channel due to ohmic losses. Your switch is now not just big and bulky, it’s complicated (since you need an additional HV supply) and pretty sensitive to things like stray capacitances. On the previous pic the big black brick on top of the PCB is the capacitor that dumps into the IGBT gates to make them switch fast enough.
Finally, I believe there’s a regulatory issue. I think I’m right in saying that automotive standards around the world require that all electrical systems are fused, and considering that there’s multiple separate power rails it’s not inconceivable that an event could take place that leaves the HV drive rail powered on but kills the 12V accessory rail that powers a lot of the CAN systems. You could end up disabling your active fuse while the HV system is still energized, and considering the amperage our lithium packs can deliver (P85D draws up to 1.5kA) that’s not going to end well.
Woz: I would LOVE to put you under a Tesla NDA and then give you a _real_ tour of the vehicle - ping me at kpaget@teslamotors.com if you’re interested. I’m curious, do you still have one of my RFID cloners on your shelf somewhere?"
I think woz is perhaps staring at a big bank of 3, 5, 10 and 20A fuses though. As mentioned in my other comment, experimental aircraft have a few different instrumented electronic circuit breaker solutions such as http://verticalpower.com/ which can integrate with the cockpit EFIS.
I wish the FCC could subpoena financial records and to see the price consumers pay for Wi-Fi and the total revenue Wi-Fi sales made for Marriott. I would be willing to bet those numbers would make it harder for Marriott to argue this is anything other than an attempt to gouge captive consumers.
Worth pointing out, again, that this is not about charges for in-room wifi, but rather for wifi in larger conference spaces in the hotel.
Which can easily run into thousands of dollars for a weekend, so if an event wants to do, say, live streaming, they do their best to make it impossible for the event to bring its own hotspot and connection.
Do you have a source for that? I read the actual FCC announcement from FCC.gov and it says:
"Marriott employees had used containment features of a Wi-Fi monitoring system at the Gaylord Opryland to prevent individuals from connecting to the Internet via their own personal Wi-Fi networks, while at the same time charging consumers, small businesses and exhibitors as much as $1,000 per device to access Marriott's Wi-Fi network."
In your room or in the conference center you should be able to use your own Wi-Fi without interference.
I know many hotel chains have outsourced their wifi handling to third parties, who often gouge the hotels at least as badly as the hotels gouge the customers. So while the Marriott no doubt makes a lot of revenue from wifi I wouldn't be surprised if they make basically no profit.
The European Center for Constitutional and Human Rights has filed a criminal complaint against U.S. torture program architects and members of the Bush Administration. The organization has accused CIA director George Tenet and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld of war crimes and they’ve called for a German prosecutor to conduct an immediate investigation.
>"Off-Topic: Most stories about politics, or crime, or sports, unless
they're evidence of some interesting new phenomenon. ... If they'd cover
it on TV news, it's probably off-topic."
Has there been a ruling on if the scanning creates a derivative work in New Zealand? The crazy argument in the US has been that the digital scanned copy is a new derivative work that gets copyright based on the scan date.
On the contrary, Feist Publications v. Rurual Telephone Service Company[1] (SCOTUS, 1991) and Bridgeman Art Library v. Corel Corp[2] (NY district judge, 1990) both seem to show that scanning a document without original authorship does NOT support copyright in US law.
The cousin of that argument is you can't copyright a media change. Otherwise I'd own the copyright on a ripped CD/DVD. Or I'd own the copyright on anything I have ever photocopied. Or for that matter, a printing press owner would own the copyright of anything he ever printed, which is certainly not the case.
(edited to add, another good example, is if media changes could be copyrighted, every academic paper with a quotation I've ever written would mean I now own the primary quoted source, which creates a weird chicken and egg for plagiarism where I don't need to cite myself as the source of my own words, so I need not cite anything I quote because I'd own it as part of the act of quoting it... so you can not have plagiarism if you can copyright media changes)
First, you are ignoring that derivative works have copyright from both the original author and the person making the creative alterations.
Second, plagiarism is an ethical standard that exists independent of law. It does not need copyright to exist. If you didn't write it, you quote it. Even if the original writer assigned copyright to you and you alone.
For the record: copyright in the US is largely about creativity. Other jurisdictions can and do vary (England & Wales have a "sweat of the brow" test).
