Slashdot Mirror

O RLY ?

Because tax evasion is defined differently in different countries The USA is one of the last countries to have a unitary tax system. In many countries, tax evasion would apply only to the taxes owed but not paid by an individual or corporation on its earnings within that country. So, from the Swiss point of view, if you are paid up on your Swiss income tax, you're OK. The United States insists on taxing any individual or corporation who earns or has earned any income anywhere in the world as long as they maintain residency, or citizenship, or base their business within US borders.

I can't, but there are online legal dictionaries that can give a general sense. Libel Definition Based on that, I don't see how the court could have made this ruling, other than the fact that his own crime, and the subsequent email telling everyone about it, will cause his reputation harm.

I can't believe I'm posting this, but I believe you mean willy-nilly rather than higgledy-piggledy.

The former means "by compulsion, without choice, in a haphazard or spontaneous manner " while the latter refers to that which is "In utter disorder or confusion, topsy-turvy, jumbled."

I take great care with my language, which is why I'm bothering to respond, troll though you are (as I correctly categorized you :-).

From Mirriam-webster online:

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/diatribe

1 archaic : a prolonged discourse
2: a bitter and abusive speech or writing
3: ironic or satirical criticism

Note, your usage is flagged "archaic", much like your anti-GPL tirades :-)

More information (if such were needed).

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/diatribe

  A bitter, abusive denunciation.
[Latin diatriba, learned discourse, from Greek diatrib, pastime, lecture, from diatrbein, to consume, wear away : dia-, intensive pref.; see dia- + trbein, to rub; see ter-1 in Indo-European roots.]
Word History: Listening to a lengthy diatribe may seem like a waste of time, an attitude for which there is some etymological justification. The Greek word diatrib, the ultimate source of our word, is derived from the verb diatrbein, made up of the prefix dia-, "completely," and trbein, "to rub," "to wear away, spend, or waste time," "to be busy." The verb diatrbein meant "to rub hard," "to spend or waste time," and the noun diatrib meant "wearing away of time, amusement, serious occupation, study," as well as "discourse, short ethical treatise or lecture, debate, argument." It is the serious occupation of time in discourse, lecture, and debate that gave us the first use of diatribe recorded in English (1581), in the now archaic sense "discourse, critical dissertation." The critical element of this kind of diatribe must often have been uppermost, explaining the origin of the current sense of diatribe, "a bitter criticism."

Again, your usage of the word is "now archaic".

Please learn the current use of the language before engaging in discourse with your betters, else learn to tug your forelock appropriately :-).

Jeremy.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/decimate

jury of one's peers n. a guaranteed right of criminal defendants, in which "peer" means an "equal." This has been interpreted by courts to mean that the available jurors include a broad spectrum of the population, particularly of race, national origin and gender. Jury selection may include no process which excludes those of a particular race or intentionally narrows the spectrum of possible jurors. It does not mean that women are to be tried by women, Asians by Asians, or African Americans by African Americans.

Not that I agree with that, but it would point to the founders going against the idea of appointed "special" jurors.

For future reference, "kha-ka" is spelled "caca" and it's a deformation of the Mexican Spanish "cuacha," meaning "shit."

Unless, of course, you meant cockeyed, which should be clear on its face that it means "cross-eyed."

http://acronyms.thefreedictionary.com/BMW

BMW Bayerische Motoren Werke (Bavarian Motor Works; German auto manufacturer)

"You can check out the kernel code for many of the BSD variants out there, including Darwin, and let us know just how far OS X is from 4.4-Lite compared to the rest."

You may also need to look up the word variant. So in an argument where I say it is not the same and you claim it is, you want me to assess how different it is? So basically, it is the same and if I don't believe that I should measure the difference . WOW! I didn't think you could find a way to appear more absurd, but you pulled it off!

Usage Note: Council, counsel, and consul are never interchangeable, though their meanings are related. Council and councilor refer principally to a deliberative assembly (such as a city council or student council), its work, and its membership. Counsel and counselor pertain chiefly to advice and guidance in general and to a person (such as a lawyer or camp counselor) who provides it. Consul denotes an officer in the foreign service of a country.

http://acronyms.thefreedictionary.com/CLM

Which of these meanings of "CLM" did you mean? I presume career limiting move, but please don't do this to readers... making them look up CLM when all you need to do is write a few more characters to make your meaning clear?

Yeah, but then you don't get the smug feeling of belonging/elitism when only a fraction of the population has a clue what the fuck you just said.

http://acronyms.thefreedictionary.com/CLM

Which of these meanings of "CLM" did you mean? I presume career limiting move, but please don't do this to readers... making them look up CLM when all you need to do is write a few more characters to make your meaning clear?

This falls squarely into the dictum that obfuscation is not the same as security, see http://encyclopedia2.thefreedictionary.com/Security+by+obfuscation.

As an example, does the security afforded by the RSA, DES/3DES and BLOWFISH ciphers come from keeping their algorithms secret? On the contrary, their algorithms are very well known ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RSA, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triple_DES, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blowfish_(cipher) ). Instead, their effectiveness and robustness in the face of scrutiny comes from being well designed.

In order to tend towards security, the goal should be one of good design, rather than of hiding defects. Having many eyes scrutinize an algorithm or piece of code, as is the case for the above ciphers and open source software alike, serves as an aid in attaining that goal.

Yes. They. Are.

According to this recent study, 97% of specialists and 82% of scientists in general agree with anthropomorphic climate change.

So, what's your evidence that scientists do not agree? Put up or shut up.

Dude, not to be pedantic about it or anything, but I think you meant anthropogenic climate change.

Yes. They. Are.

According to this recent study, 97% of specialists and 82% of scientists in general agree with anthropomorphic climate change.

So, what's your evidence that scientists do not agree? Put up or shut up.

Dude, not to be pedantic about it or anything, but I think you meant anthropogenic climate change.

This is *less* dangerous than if he were talking about Bubonic Plague and released lab mice - the mice would chew on wiring.

Get a grip.

If the mice chewed through the wiring, wouldn't you need a gaffer instead of a grip?

This is *less* dangerous than if he were talking about Bubonic Plague and released lab mice - the mice would chew on wiring.

Get a grip.

If the mice chewed through the wiring, wouldn't you need a gaffer instead of a grip?

You guys are attached to one specific meaning/sense of the word while ignoring others. Many dictionaries state that "to steal" can also mean "to obtain without permission", "to use without acknowledgement" and explicitly refer to ideas or work. For example: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/steal.

It's "articles" like this what does that Slashdot is turning more and more into a cheap yelow page online magazine.

And it's grammatical hotchpotches like this that make the comments section become unreadable!

Charlatary : a person who makes false claims.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Charlatanry

You decide.

The IRS ceased her home

Oh, did they really. Her house just stopped did it? I find that very hard to believe. When it just ceased, did it vanish out of the timeline within the blink of an eye, or was it a more gradual swirling effect?

If you are old enough to remember a story from ten years ago and you memory still serves you well enough to recall it on a whim of connection to this article about the US army - then you certainly are a candidate to recognize and distinguish the two words: seized, ceased.

Don't come back until you have learned a lesson and feel at least somewhat ashamed.

The IRS ceased her home

Oh, did they really. Her house just stopped did it? I find that very hard to believe. When it just ceased, did it vanish out of the timeline within the blink of an eye, or was it a more gradual swirling effect?

If you are old enough to remember a story from ten years ago and you memory still serves you well enough to recall it on a whim of connection to this article about the US army - then you certainly are a candidate to recognize and distinguish the two words: seized, ceased.

Don't come back until you have learned a lesson and feel at least somewhat ashamed.

Legal definition of a monopoly (US)

All the hub bub is because MS had established an unfair advantage in the first place due to proven illegal and shady practices in getting their entire package the default install for the vast bulk of all but apple products for years and years on desktop and laptop computers. They took that crooked corporate mindset and practice and instituted a legally defined monopoly for office suites, browsers, etc. It isn't "some judge" that ruled on this, there exists a lot of case law both in the US and the EU on this subject. They have been busted, charged and convicted numerous times now, and have also been charged and fined for failing to follow court orders in the past.

If you are talking about laws, you must use the legal definition, not some other definition that you personally think is the correct one, it just doesn't work that way and no amount of your arrogance is going to make it work that way. A legal monopoly does not require 100% of a market to be a monopoly, just the lion's share as determined by whichever jurisdiction you are addressing. Microsoft corporation is a proven convicted abusive monopolist, full stop, in a few major jurisdictions. They have been offered remedies to follow, which they ignored for the most part, been fined, been warned, yet they continue to seek monopolistic advange due to their use of huge sums of cash money and influence. Witness all the controversy over document standards we just went through. smoke>fire It never ends with those guys, they don't care.

Personally, I think they have gotten off easy, they should have either had their corporate charters removed (they deserve it frankly, few other companies get away with as much crap as they have pulled), or have been broken up into several smaller and independent corporations, with a several year judicial trust oversight. Such as basic operating system/kernel, office suite, browser, etc. Just their completely insecure products being on the internet have cost global society billions and billions of dollars due to the past ease of pwnage and their corporate mindset of bling over security and quality. If they were a tangibles products company, they would have long ago been shut down for shippng products that completely failed the "suitability for purpose" caveat with normal warranties, their products have not been suitable for internet access for the average consumer and for the bulk of even professional maintainers at corporations, they still get owned daily, what is the latest botnet up to again, some millions in just a few weeks? that's thr result of an abusive corporate monopoly who leverated power to dominance despite their quality (historical lack thereof) not being up to a more robust standard of suitability.

As to this "vast majority" etc of people, they have no options to see. In my area, there are NO alternatives to MS products on the shelves at ANY place that sells computers, from the largest chains to the smallest whitebox shops. This so called "vast majority" isn't even aware there are alternatives out there, again, from chronic past abuse of monopoly in particular with the "deals" they strongarmed the OEM people with.

Remember that pornography is legally defined on a "I know it when I see it" basis, i.e. if it arouses sexual interest. http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/pornography

If turbidostato supposedly created a "new derogatory term for closed source software", what was it?

Privative software.

priv-a-tive (prv-tv)
adj.
1. Causing deprivation, lack, or loss.
2. Grammar Altering the meaning of a term from positive to negative.

It's kind of naive the way you blame pirates for the excesses of the industry.

Excesses of the industry? We're talking about Nintendo handhelds here. You're probably the only one in history who has considered that market "excessive". (Whatever that's supposed to mean.)

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/excesses
He's referring to the fourth definition. The implication is that Nintendo is greedy and trying to make as much money as possible at the expense of its customers.

Did you miss the part where we were talking about a handheld console? Right of first sale is NOT impeded by encryption of DS game cards any more than the NES lockout chip impeded the right of first sale.

But first sale rights are impeded by region locking. In this global market, I ought to be able to sell my DSi cartridge to someone in Europe. Unfortunately, they won't be able to play it.

Normally they don't. But in this case, they do. Nintendo has produced seven generations or so of handheld game consoles. Not a single one supported region codes until the DSi. It stands to reason that if Nintendo wasn't trying to lock out pirates with new protection technology, there's a good chance the region codes never would have made it into this system.

Why does this stand to reason? You're begging the question here--presupposing the conclusion as its own explanation. Critically thinking, what on earth does region coding have to do with piracy? Why have others in the industry embraced region coding? Did it have to do with piracy then?

Actually gauntlet is the preferred spelling for both, although the etymology behind the use of gauntlet for punishment is different (the first meaning is from French, the second from Spanish). Gantlet is also correct, although archaic, for both.

See: gauntlet.

And Microsoft has seen the writing on the wall, and they have been trying damn hard with IE 7 and now IE 8, but it's quite clear that the great minds who brought us IE 4 and 5 (yeah they were great at the time) died in a car crash or something, or they got dulled and their enthusiasm waxed

Small nitpick

s/waxed/waned

I believe the phrase is "case in point".

Give them an inch, and they take a foot.

That's, "Give someone an inch and they'll take a mile." Unless of course you meant to say "Give them an inch, and they will sever your foot", in which case you are likely right.

There's nothing wrong with that word: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/irregardless

Private is a term describing the service sectors. Private and public. The Public service is little more then an denotation that jobs are being done for the government instead of the private sector. Public servants aren't servants of the public, they are people who perform jobs in the public service. Private investigator are investigators who are not public employees, they are working in the private sector.

It has nothing to do with the target of the investigation and everything with the service sector.

According to Arkansas state law 17-40-102 (20)"Private investigator" means any person who performs one (1) or more services as described in subdivision (13) of this section

(13)"Investigations company" means any person who engages in the business or accepts employment to obtain or furnish information with reference to:
    (A)Crime or wrongs done or threatened against the United States or any state or territory of the United States;
    (B)The identity, habits, conduct, business, occupation, honesty, integrity, credibility, knowledge, trustworthiness, efficiency, loyalty, activity, movement, whereabouts, affiliations, associations, transactions, acts, reputation, or character of any person;
    (C)The location, disposition, or recovery of lost or stolen property;
    (D)The cause or responsibility for fires, libels, losses, accidents, damages, or injuries to persons or to property; or
    (E)The securing of evidence to be used before any court, board, officer, or investigating committee;

If the reporters were conducting an investigation, they would fall under 13- (A),(b) and likely (E). If they were reporting a story and inquiring to the facts of the story, they would be nothing but reporters doing their jobs (which might require a private investigators license). But declaring their actions a criminal investigation would most certainly require the license and registration.

Violations are class A misdemeanors unless it happens twice within one year then it becomes a class D felony.

Chomp is just a variant of champ. The OED says it was "Formerly only dial. and U.S.", but has become widespread and includes citations for "chomping at the bit" back to 1937.

Just an FYI, not intended as an insult. The idiom is champing at the bit.

A claim is a claim is a claim. A legal claim is a claim that is based on a law or legal precedence/right against a person or entity. It does not have to be in a court or files with the state in any way. If your going to make an assertion about the law, at least look it up and know what the fuck you are talking about. A simple google search for legal claim provides not only Wikipedia results but several links to legal dictionaries that define the terms quite nicely.

It doesn't matter what they know or what they are trying to do or what they think. They have to have a basis for the claim or it becomes slanderous and libelous. It doesn't even matter that most or all are dropped without going to court, it is still a legal claim. If you settle that claim, inside or outside of the court, it is a settlement until a point when it becomes adjudicated. At that point, there is no settlement left.

You can threaten to sue all you want; until you do, I have no (legal) reason to give in to your demands. And even if I do, I can still be sued.

This is true. But a claim is nothing more then a statement that under some law or right of law, you think you are entitled to something because of some action or inaction on someone's part. If you don't recognize the claim, then the plaintiff or Claimant has to go to a competent court with jurisdiction and convince a judge that his claim has standing. Then he argues why it accurate and why you are responsible and you argue why it isn't and so on. If something goes wrong, it can goto a level of appeals to be rectified. Once that is done, the judge (judges) issues a judgment that determines the final validity of the claim and details like actual and legal obligations of the defendant(s) but now it has the force of law behind it and several legal tools to aid in the collection or enforcement of the judgment.

A claim can be used as a threat, but the two words are not interchangeable when talking about the law. A claim is a claim is a claim. A settlement is the ending of that claim, inside or out of a court of law.

No; it fell out of common use and returned with a slightly different meaning.

It may have been, but it 'had been out of use for a long period, [and] has been rejuvenated in recent years' and with a subtly different meaning, too.

So I still claim that, in modern use at least, it's an example of verbing.

Why just cases vs RIAA? Now THAT is a pretty damned good question! It might just be that the tactics of the RIAA's legal team are so reprehensible that people are volunteering to fight them. If you are a judge or know one, you should perhaps help point this out to them.

It has always been my thinking that Harvard law school very rarely ever comes out on the wrong side of a legal issue. It is their business after all. That term Preponderance of evidence would seem to apply here when so many law schools are weighing in on this issue, and doing so against the RIAA legal team.

It would seem to me that this should be seen as a very bad omen for the RIAA et al. When all the kids circle around and start picking on the class bully, things normally get sorted out, and the bully gets a black eye or two as needed. I think that is what we might be witnessing in the greater stage of legal theater.

Are apples and pears opposites because they are different fruits, or are they just different? And if they are not opposites, does that mean they're the same or are they still just different?

It's fine for you to rely on a "common-sense understanding" as stupid as "whatever was practiced by Hitler" (It was MUSSOLINI who invented 'fascism' btw...) but when you enter discussions to share bullshit opinions based on ignorance...

...you might as well keep your mouth shut!

Are apples and pears opposites because they are different fruits, or are they just different? And if they are not opposites, does that mean they're the same or are they still just different?

It's fine for you to rely on a "common-sense understanding" as stupid as "whatever was practiced by Hitler" (It was MUSSOLINI who invented 'fascism' btw...) but when you enter discussions to share bullshit opinions based on ignorance...

...you might as well keep your mouth shut!

a process of change in a certain direction
a process of gradual, peaceful, progressive change
gradual development
any sort of progressive development

HAND

We're gonna throw dinner rolls at one another?

Amazingly enough, the term bunfight has nothing to do with fighting or buns (or indeed food of any sort).

Oh well, it's not exactly like it's the first time a Briticism has been used incorrectly on /.

Well that's one theory. Here's another.

We're gonna throw dinner rolls at one another?

Amazingly enough, the term bunfight has nothing to do with fighting or buns (or indeed food of any sort).

Oh well, it's not exactly like it's the first time a Briticism has been used incorrectly on /.

It's a common mistake, though not a particularly pervasive or ignorant one, so I'm going to assume that it's one of those words you've heard said and have never seen written down. With that in mind, this is purely educational: It's spelled Hocked , not hawked.

Happy learning!

Your concept of overdose is wholly incorrect. From http://www.thefreedictionary.com/overdose :

overdose
Noun
a larger dose of a drug than is safe: she tried to kill herself with an overdose of alcohol and drugs.
Verb
[-dosing, -dosed]
to take more of a drug than is safe, either accidentally or deliberately: this drug is rarely prescribed because it is easy to overdose fatally on it.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/creationist

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creationist

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/creationism

Look, I respect people who are at least smart enough to realise "hey, the world is more then 6000 years old"... well about as much as I respect anyone who doesn't believe in orbital teapots... however calling yourself a creationist is:

A: Inaccurate
B: Providing a protectionary blanket to idiots
C: A lack of knowledge on the term

Creationists believe the bible literally... 6k years. If they believe otherwise, they're not a creationist. Same for ID, fundamentalist, or whatever other group of people who have decided to worship a fake book instead of understanding the world around them.

I agree with his "Lumping of all creationists" in this matter because it's accurate. Just like you could lump all bipeds together because they walk on two legs. It's in the definition.

Congradulations, you're not a creationist. As such we welcome you back to the sane majority of the planet (Or minority if you're in America). Glad to have you back.

I'm really looking forward to the day when the sane faithful rise up against the ignorance of those who have chosen to worship a book opposed to understanding the world their god created.

Priapistic? You use that word a lot. I do not think it means what you think it means!

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2006-02/uom-htn022206.php

http://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/be+as+scarce+as+hen's+teeth

Maybe, say, "Humans' Beaks"... that might buy you some time, hehehe...