I have been running the Pi since 2012 from the early days of Raspbmc to OSMC and sometime in 2013 starting watching and recording television using it.
I have ATSC (North American Over-The-Air TV) which is similar to DVB-T. I use an HDHomerun Network TV tuner. I watch using my Pi running OSMC and an Add-on for DVBLink, and when I select record, I use DVBLink software which runs on my Synology NAS. DVBLink however is paid software that can run on the Pi, as well as many other platforms (Windows, Linux, Asustor, Netgear, QNAP, Synology, Western Digital).
I tried using TVHeadend but found the interface and support of DVBLink to be better.
In another article I read this month (but can't seem to find right now) it was explained that "terrorism" was mostly... a social network -- and the article above agrees with that characterization, I think.
This whole mess doesn't have a lot to do with religion, Islam or otherwise; it's about young people trying to find meaning.
It may sound absurd, preposterous, ridiculous, despicable even, to compare today's terrorists to peaceniks from the 60s, but dismissing them as "crazies" is even more wrong, and less helpful.
(And I say this as a Frenchman having lived in Paris all my life).
Well every crawler has to have this list, the Blekko crawler tries to keep these pages out of the index (with varying levels of success). But its not particularly useful for non-crawlers, and since every crawler will have a way of evaluating hosts (possibly uniquely) it isn't really transportable.
That said, if you have ever wondered why domains that used to have web sites on them suddenly become huge spam havens, it is because spammers buy up the domain as soon as it expires and try to exploit its previous reputation as a non-spam site, to push link authority into some (generally Google's) crawl.
I agree with you in principle, but I believe these agreements exist so that you can't take a $10m payout (and drop the legal case with a no-fault agreement), and then turn around and tell the media that "I was paid $10m, but they TOTALLY were at fault". It'd come across as disingenuous all around (company & victim).
To make it go away. It happens all the time--generally when something is settled, it has a "no admission of guilt" statement attached somewhere. Both sides agree not to talk about it, and that ends that. It's useful in a case where it'd be difficult to prove conclusively one way or another, and it could hurt a company to have the publicity. It's probably cheaper for a company to pay $10m and make it go away than to fight a year-long legal battle, even if they eventually win, since there are bound to be stories linking them to something bad.
> up to now, [traffic predictions] [were] limited to Google Maps for Work customers only.
Does it mean that the new traffic predictions, as well as the
except for Google Maps for Work customers, but they are accessible to
the general public via some other API?
It appears so, but they state "for now" so I'm guessing it will be available (hopefully) soon.
Yes. If journals are biased against negative results, then governments should move in. Why do we need "journals" with the implication of a limited page count per issue anyway; in this digital age a database or wikipedia-style format should be able to host any number of results.
And it should not mater that some governments won't fund suchan initiative: all is needed is one, or a single benefactor, or maybe a tv-show à la Mythbusters. ResearchBusters would be a hell of a show!!
I recommend reading responses to other branches of the grandparent that address this.
I agree that if people do decent studies and get null results, it would be nice if the data became publicly available so further studies can be seen in the context of previous negative results.
But given the need for novelty in results, I wonder how much work actually duplicates work previously undertaken with a null result. I suspect it's much less than many people in this discussion are assuming.
And secondly, there's the issue of forcing people to do decent write-ups. Study results are useless without a very detailed description of both the experimental setup and the data collection/analysis procedures that were followed. Those write-ups take time and effort, and for an unpublishable result many researchers won't find the motivation. One could argue that funding agencies and institutional IRBs must force researchers to write much of this ahead of running the experiment. That might help a bit, but will still leave substantial holes.
Yeah I'm sure someone could unblock it, but I doubt they blocked it in the first place on purpose: OSM must be in some default list when McAfee Web Gateway is first installed, and that's probably the root of the problem...