Slashdot Mirror

If a person is found not guilty in a murder trial, how is it that they can be charged in a civil trial for damages from a murder they are not guilty of? If you don't see that as double jeopardy you are either blind, or a complete idiot who should live inside of a box and not be allowed to participate in society.

You then define a grand jury nearly absolutely incorrect. What you got right is that it's more people than a standard 12 person Jury, but 16 is the normal. You seem to imply it's a massive amount of difference, contrary to reality.

The rest is completely wrong, please go do some reading. I'd recommend going to a University Law page as opposed to Wiki so that you truly understand what a grand jury is. Check State vs. Federal grand juries, they are not the same. Lastly find out who gets to see a grand jury, because here is a hint.. most of us would never see a grand jury, but if you have power and money you will.

A grand jury does not charge anyone, they rule on whether or not the person "should" be charged. A prosecutor can always go outside of a grand jury ruling and file charges, but this is used as an "out" for a prosecutor not to process someone (though that was not the original intent). Grand juries are closed door, and do not necessarily use randomly selected members.

See, for e.g.:

"What is a "runaway" grand jury?" http://campus.udayton.edu/~gra...

I just read an article about a young woman whose only crime was that she gave her boy-friend's Mother a ride to a house. The older woman went in unbeknownst to the girl for crack cocaine and was busted inside the house by an undercover officer. The girl received a mandatory 12 year prison sentence without the possibility of parole. She had no criminal record, was in the top 2% of her High School Class, volunteered public service regularly and had multiple scholarships for college. Even the Judge who presided over the case called it a grotesque miscarriage of justice and that these "hard on crime laws" with mandatory sentences that don't provide judicial discretion are stuffing the prisons with innocent people.

There are still people in Texas doing a life sentence for a gram of hash. Read this article to find out about some of the most ludicrous prosecutions that portray a gross disregard for people that has become commonplace in certain regions of the United States. There are many people in prison whose only crime is possession. The prosecution of poorer Americans (which means disproportionately people of color), has become a conveyor belt that is prison bound. The war on crime has created a legal assembly line with millions now serve (3 in 4 people in prison today are there as a result of the war on crime.) The police sandbag those they arrest to assure a prison sentence. Heaping felonies on a defendant, the defendant is then forced to choose a plea bargain for 10 years while facing 110 years worth of charges. Public defense is barely better than no defense at all. So innocent and guilty alike are shoveled into prison like human refuse. The war on drug has imploded the criminal justice system, and turned it into a revolving door that feeds people indiscriminately in, and to abate prison overcrowding lets others out, then again you have those states that have now turned their privatized prisons into labor camps, and the vary companies that provide prisons have lobbied for longer and harsher sentences because its good for their bottom line.

There is abundant information talking about the disproportionate prosecution of people of color for drug related crimes. You could read this article or this scholarly article. Before you comment on this, please bother to get at least basically informed on the subject. Something is rotten in the state of Denmark... er America.

Finally, the fact that you don't know about the corporate connections to Marijuana becoming illegal in the first place and remaining so currently just emphasizes that you haven't done your homework. You can go here to read this article to find out how an over ambitious Federal Agent and William Randolph Hearst worked together to demonize hemp in the first place. Today Big Pharma spends millions to keep Pot illegal because they don't want competition for their prescription analgesics, synthetic opiates, anti-nauseals, appetite enhancers, mood elevators and anti-carcinogenic drugs, and there's no money on a natural substance you can't patent. If it sucks today and involves more than 3 people, I can follow the money back to a lawyer, a politician and a corporation or a religious fanatic. That is the sad state of American in the twenty first century. Wake Up

Are you sure about that? Have you heard of Good Samaritan/Duty to Assist laws? What about suicide?

http://academic.udayton.edu/legaled/crimlaw/02-Elements/03casekGenovese.htm
http://digitalcommons.lmu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1343&context=llr

Look:
It is a verifiable fact that the U.S. government broke every single treaty they made with the natives.

It is a verifiable fact that European transplants intentionally seeded the native population with disease to exterminate them.

Estimates place the number of Native Americans killed by European invaders anywhere between 1.8 and 100 million.

There's even a Wikipedia entry for the North American Genocide.

You can continue to deny what's in front of your face all you like, just know what sort of company you keep when you do so.

The divide between rich and poor has never been so big

Are you sure about this? I'm sure there was a much bigger difference between a king or duke in the Middle Ages who could order anyone's head chopped off at will, who could seize anyone's land, and who could basically do what he wanted, to people today.

Too far. I am assuming that GP referred to this century rather than to the history of the world. When the cave-men roamed the earth, there was even less divide between rich and poor. Plus King is not the same as "rich". Kings/Dukes would be closer to President/Senators, while the "rich" are the bankers, etc. Anyway, for most of the 20th century, the GP claim is accurate: See here after cursory search.

Well, NCR did screw with a lot of people after AT&T bought them in the 80's. They are not the humanely profitable(nor innovative) employer they once were. Now they make do with clone machines and Dell/Gateway/3rd World Country rebrands.

That, and they've allowed a certain university roll over the town's history (Building 26). There is no good blood that exists that hasn't been forcibly removed from NCR.

Obviously the government should regulate VR under the doctrine that such discrimination represents a "badge of slavery".

...as they demolished a historical building after railroading about every obstacle in town, and putting some remains in an obscure spot.

Had Bletchley Park been in the US(and next to the named university), they'd have let a local university just roll the town over and demolish it after buying the land from NCR for $1.

It's a shame that PGP, IBM, and friends couldn't have come sooner to save NCR's Building 26.

So, if I didn't think you were lying, you'd have one example, which isn't supported by anything more than your word, which is useless.

So yes, as I said worthless.

Your opinion about it is irrelevant.

>I don't know where you are from, but around here you don't get printed unless you're being charged with a crime.

Here in the US DWB is enough of a crime to justify getting printed ...on your way to jail!

i am confused on the aspect of race in this instance.

in every encounter i have ever had with the police, in a car or on foot, i have never had my car or my person searched, even when i was a passenger in a car that was pulled over for drag racing in I5 in seattle. white people's encounters with the police often go swimmingly. black people's encounters... not so often.

also, he didn't get a DUI.

-No. In other words, perhaps if workers did what they were paid for (high-quality output) versus simply throwing pieces together in a "screw the company" mentality to just get their paycheck at the end of the week, then everybody would see a benefit. Lower returns to the producer, happier consumer, lower prices, all that good stuff. My point is that workers aren't holding up their end of the deal.

Maybe you need to see the other side of the equation, where human rights in the workplace can generate profits.

Example - NCR, pre and post globalization are two different animals, the latter being only a shell of a profitable company.

NCR during the days of allowing human rights up until the early 1980s had performed well - without having unions, but actually promoting the welfare of the worker by providing nearly everything the worker needed, from housing(a bit extreme now, but in some ages that was a godsend) to a private university education (which can thwart the "Company Store" argument, and that the university was separate from NCR). These days, the corporation has been bought and spun off from AT&T, demolished the near entirety of their campus and sold nearly all of it to a university(part of it is thankfully in the hands of a newspaper) that now is nothing but an exclusive party school(with a pricetag that prices most of the 40k average out at 31k). What happened other than a major amount of toxic chemicals was the gradual phasing out of human rights that ran up to the grand finale in the 1990s with the health care/retirement controversy.

Now they're just reduced to a minor footnote of a company that once paralleled IBM with products that proudly matched the high quality of their workers(notwithstanding the health concerns). The only thing they do is repackage low quality products like ECS boards into expensive solutions, or breathe life into ATMs(which are ironically the highest quality construction of their products by intention).

Look across the nation and world(specifically the UK) and you'll see examples much like this, all with the same ironic downward spiral that began with Thatcher/Reagan up to today with the job nearly complete in worker rights reversal. I'm amazed that they did so in such short time.


When they perform quality work, they should be rewarded. When unionized workers slack off, think of how long it takes to fire one of these morons? Major example is with the police.

With lower paying jobs, the protection is needed, it's not like you can't come up with some workaround like y'all did with "Buy America" (*cough*New Flyer/AM General/MAN of Germany*cough*), requirements to hire US workers(as seen later on), and offshoring(the REAL slogan of Hewlett "Hurd's just as bad as Fiorina" Packard). The police in particular are guaranteed a job short of major law violations- would you rather have them worrying about job security more or enforcing the law more- there being not really any room for anything else?


Your argument for communism is totally out of whack. Specifically Marxism is the best form of theoretical government. But as we all know, 'it aint happenin'.

2006, 2008, 2010, 2012. It wont be Marxism taking over, but we'll at least correct the corporate imbalance on a more permanent basis this time.

America is America, money talks, bullshit walks, and I can speak as a business owner when I say that I will pay a worker his worth. I won't pay somebody 3x what they are worth. Nor will I pay them less. But you seem to leave out the business owners in your equation.

Yet your kind cares not to pay even the fair worth, uses such tricks as "requirements exceeding existence of skills" to get around regulation to hire foreign workers, drives companies into deliberate bankruptcy to attempt to void union contracts, and buys up legislation that defangs anyone that wants to unionize in even the most deser

If only the Republicans would conduct the war the way heroic democrats did.

Nothing says freedom like making every news agency clear every report through the federal government and free housing for japanese-americans! Oh, and Canada did it too.

Clearly, the Reuplicans have gone too far.

I believe you forgot the near-dead, services based sellout known as National Cash Register. They only share small amounts of history in the early times of the cash register. After that, they're mostly separate. Now, they both do their own types, but on a much lesser scale than known previously - current NCR machines are just NCR labeled hardware with NT and BassPoiNT loaded in.

As for both IBM/NCR's R&D divisions, they are probably best stated as standstill due to "globalization". The kind that sells off anything, even land to land grab happy entities that overstate their moral character, or moves jobs (uncompetitively) to places far enough out of the US to keep them well out of reach of any interested US citizen willing to rightfully take back his job in the "not-so-free market".

Maybe the human factor might need to be put back in economics before a C-level be publicly executed (and with noone to care to act as a witness) to return the lack of their organization's humanity in kind.

I knew there was a reason why I went to the University of Dayton! And it wasn't for the beer!

Never been to UD? Huge party school; where else could you get drunk and throw up on the Wright brothers graves? I think Playboy voted them #1 party school some time ago.

Who the hell is this guy?

In my exuberance, I forgot that not everyone here was up walking on two feet when the 386 was introduced in 19-freakin-86! Of course, logic dictates that the processor, or at least its exact specification, must be available before an operating system can take advantage of it. That explains why the first version of Windows to exploit any 32-bit features of the 386 was introduced in 1987. And that's why Intel's position that they were wait for the OS was ready before releasing the chips is nonsense.

So what Intel was really doing all this time was delaying the inevitable. They were afraid of introducing any commodity 64-bit processors (x86-64) that would make their future cash-cow IA64 product even more undesirable than it already was (and still is). And now that AMD is going gangbusters with Athlon-64 and Opteron, Intel could no longer afford to wait. The Itanium will now have to make it on its own merits, if any, instead of being forced on the unwilling IT departments of the world.

The thing that grates on me is the two-facedness (is that a word?) of Microsoft, first in promising 64-bit support for AMD, and then withholding its release until Intel has at least some form of competitive product. There is no reason that they couldn't have had full support for AMD64 by the end of 2003 at the latest. Operton was released in April '03 and of MS would have had early samples months or years before that.

And of course Michael Dell is Intel's lapdog and wouldn't dare offer any product without Intel's approval. Time will tell, but I think Dell will regret that eventually. Just because Intel will have a chip that can execute AMD64 code doesn't mean that it will do it particularly well. There's more to an architecture than just the instruction set.

CHeers!

Witnesses credibility has been under debate for years. Witnesses can be influenced by suggestive questioning, their own backgrounds and prejudices, or the amount of sleep they have had on a given day. And how do you quantify or qualify that kind of tampering? Witness testimony has been used for millenia. No evidence is foolproof. The problem is 1. to know what kind of tampering can be done and be aware and wary of it and 2. to get the trust of the public in that type of evidence so it can be admitted, falible or not.

Maybe you should have read the XMF (eXtensible Music Format) FAQ, which addressed the shortcomings of music notations. In addition, XMF's predecessor, RMID, also allows embedding of DLS samples, is available for free download, and viewable online.

P.S. I really wanna see if this university's pipe can take it :D

To quote from the second source:

Perjury before a grand jury is covered by a special statute with odd features. If one lies before a grand jury and then recants--tells the truth--before the grand jury or the prosecutor is aware of the lie, the witness has a defense to a perjury prosecution. In some perjury prosecutions a witness tells one version in the morning of his appearance before the grand jury and tells a different version in the afternoon. The grand jury perjury statute states that the government can make out a case based on the contradictory testimony itself. It need not prove which statement was true and which statement was false.

- If the United Nations ordered the United States to disarm, we wouldn't either.

- While British troops did use the smallpox trick, according to this reference, so did we:

See Ann F. Ramenofsky, Vectors of Death: The Archaeology of European Contact (Albuquerque, NM: University of New Mexico Press, 1987):

Among Class I agents, Variola major holds a unique position. Although the virus is most frequently transmitted through droplet infection, it can survive for a number of years outside human hosts in a dried state (Downie 1967; Upham 1986). As a consequence, Variola major can be transmitted through contaminated articles such as clothing or blankets (Dixon 1962). In the nineteenth century, the U.S. Army sent contaminated blankets to Native Americans, especially Plains groups, to control the Indian problem (Stearn and Stearn 1945). [p. 148]

See also Robert L. O'Connell, Of Arms and Men: A History of War, Weapons, and Aggression (NY and Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1989):

- The claims of Iraq "being connected to" Bin Laden have never stated that they did so at any given time. My point was that a claim that vague is easily made about the United States as well.

This kid could really use a copy of "RSA Laboratories' Frequently Asked Questions About Today's Cryptography" or "Applied Cryptography" or even "PGP DH vs. RSA FAQ". At the University of Dayton page on this discovery (https://alumni.udayton.edu/np_story.asp?storyID=7 84), he says that Triple-DES could be easily broken.

That is complete B.S.

Triple-DES is a 112-bit algorithm, and perhaps even stronger that Rjindael (AES), since it's been subjected to rigorous cryptanalysis for many, many years.

It seems as if the encryption technology might be secure, but without any information on it, I am very skeptical.

Jason finds way to recycle used oil
gives a more technical view of the current discovery (its a prng by the way)

Jason finds way to recycle used oil
gives a more technical view of the current discovery (its a prng by the way)

Yep, here you go. She cracked it herself shortly after it was publicised, the method is detailed in the appendix.

Also here's a link to the press release this guy's university published on his work. Although, come to think of it, it looks quite familiar. Is this a repeated story?