I did not know that.
"Texas Instruments has also been known to take action against customers who reverse engineer calculators."
Thoses would be Polish notators I assume?
804 publicly visible posts • joined 22 Jan 2008
"If the estimated life threat risk was higher than 10%, the triage form categorized patients
into A+ (the probability that the patient faced a risk of dying was very high), and an
ambulance, a fast response car, and a fire engine were dispatched."
And yet none of the questions they asked was "Are you on fire?"
There's some crap for that.
Only on iPhone. Well, and other phones which support installable programs, Which, now I come to think of it is quite a lot of them. And it doesn't load this quick in real life. Hmm. Anyone got the phone number for the Advertising Standards Authority? Oh, hang on, I can look it up in my 118 app! Oh that's odd - they seem to be ex-directory.
Is airforce HR playing the shell game with pilots? "Come along now! Three planes, one pilot, we put the pilot in here, we move 'em around and now all you gotta do is guess with your SAM which ones he's in! This one? Oh unlucky, you've shot down a drone - now come on, I'll tell you what I'll do - double or quits!"
Virginities are like expensive laptops. All the freshers have got one, all the local scrotes are after them and so those who get wasted in the bar and don't lock their dorm doors find they're gone in the morning. So get one of those Kensington security cables, and don't forget to write your postcode on it in UV marker.
Delivering to two different houses in a street doesn't represent two offences; printing the same article in two different issues of the paper does.
It is tempting to regard an on-line archive as the same as a paper archive, but it is not. If I go to my local library and get a copy of The Times from January, it is obvious that I hold in my hand (on on microfiche) an old publication. If I retrieve an article from the web, it is not obvious whether I have today's hot gossip or last years tired hackery. Attempts to argue by analogy are therefore likely to run into problems.
My feeling is that the first web hit counts as a "publication" and all subsequent hits count as additions to the size of publication (just as a libel in a national broadsheet with a readership of millions might be regarded as more serious than a libel in a local newsletter, a publicationin The Register would be more serious than a publication in The Islington Parking Meter Spotters Association homepage). Publishing another web page with the same information, however, would be a second offence.
However, I suspect this might be regarded as a sensible approach, and hence inevitably will be rejected out of hand by a legal tribunal.
I'd like to see the turn *into* that road - which he took after dark in an area which probably doesn't have streetlights. Once he'd turned in, he was committed and probably spent a mile going "Surely this isn't right? It's a bloody farm track. Damn councils just don't maintain these minor roads." until the horrible truth dawned.
Incidentally, did he "hit a fence" as in "crashed into a fence" (not an indication of good driving) or as in "go straight on until you hit Sheffield" (which is conceptually quite a nice idea, and doesn't imply careless driving)