It is true that juries have every legal right to convict or not convict according to conscience. It is also true that if you state during jury choice that you know this, or say anything about it during a trial that you can/will a) be refused jury duty or b) be held in contempt of court.
While this is an appalling state of affairs, it is still every US citizen's right and duty to make jury decisions according to their conscience. If a law is bad or being applied unjustly, you're entitled to say so and vote against conviction whether the defendant broke the law or not.
I'm glad to see that FIJA's been getting some of these things put explicitly back into the books... laws that require judges to inform juries that then can, in fact, make their decisions regardless of the law.
It's not an easy choice to make, but it is a legal choice.
That was a great article, thank you for linking it. I went looking for more information and found the Fully Informed Jury Association's home page, for anyone who's interested.
... through the comments form. (I closed the window already, so I don't have the text.) I'll post if I get anything back from them... I hope they can lend a hand, he could use all the help he can get.
Because scientific papers are dead dull to someone who hasn't followed the specific field. I've read some mycology and uredinology monographs, and they're just plain hard to read if you don't know what they're trying to say. Science News does a good job at summing things up in a scientific way, but I can't imagine any of the papers I've seen would go over well in a newspaper.
Article: "Look! We've discovered that plant rust is different from this other plant rust!"
A lot of libraries can't afford the exorbitant prices to get the journals... so they'll have a select few. Anything else, you just can't get. Freely available shouldn't mean "freely available to those within driving distance of an extremely well-off university library". The _large_ university I went to had issues with keeping some of these journals on the shelves due to costs. Any small university is pretty much out of luck.
Besides, the real issue here is that if scientists are going to pay for research, spend the time, write it up, edit it, etc... they should have some say as to how that information is made available. They're basically donating their time and effort to the journals, for pretty much zip in return.
I frankly can't see that taking the computer files used to publish the journal and running them through a quick web format would take even a small chunk out of the journal's profits.
Yeah, showing politicians film strips about potential situations really prepares us well for such attacks.
*gas slowly wafts into the senate through an air vent*
"Oh my god! We're under biological attack!"
*panic ensues*
*a lone figure stands up on the podium...*
"Wait, folks! I was here the day they showed us that film strip! I KNOW JUST WHAT TO DO!"
Let's be realistic, folks. Biological terrorism is the newest scare tactic. While the potential for serious danger is obviously there... frankly this _does_ sound like the prep work for asking for more defense money. The executive branch just isn't the place that's going to be making any useful decisions about how to prevent such an attack.
I can cope with comments asking people to check the links before they post, but asking them to go read a physics book before posting? The question was well thought out and well-worded. It was a reasonable question, and it had a reasonable answer.
Oooooh... memories. =) VikingMUD was the first online game I ever played, and the only MUD I really ever got into. Now if only I could remember what the heck my password was...
Having just gotten through Amnesty International's rather scathing 2000 report on the US, I'd have to agree with you there. It's scary enough what happens to actual citizens, if you come here from another country you have even fewer rights. I'm not going to argue that the US isn't a safer place than say, Chechnya, but safety's relative. If you're going to be detained in a prison for several years while the INS determines whether you're a valid refugee, for example, you might be a lot better off somewhere else.
Re:So why hasn't it happened?
on
Biohazard
·
· Score: 1
But a biological weapon is something that can be easily concealed, and were a country or group to use it without claiming responsibility there's not really any way to trace it...
Besides which, if a small terrorist group located in, say, Afghanistan were to attack us in such a manner I'm remarkably sure that while we'd make every attempt to make them pay for such an atrocity we sure as heck wouldn't drop a nuclear bomb in an area surrounded by civilian targets. It's called trying to be "the good guys", and it limits our options (thank goodness). It's the reason terrorists like to put their headquarters in populated areas.
So what's the real deterrent for people who aren't afraid to die for their cause? Nuclear weapons just aren't a realistic option for countering terrorist attacks, they're too hard to control.
Checking on the research that the group has done... the remnants of the shoe were classified as a women's shoe, among other reasons due to peculiarities of stitching. This classification was made by the manufacturer of the shoe, as this particular sole still had the mfg's imprint on it. The shoes Amelia Earhart wore were in fact women's shoes, but they were typically functional and of styles similar to men's shoes.
Here's the link to that page of research. Note that they don't claim it's her shoe, but give evidence from the finds and from photographs taken as she left on her voyage.
I have to say, overall I'm pretty impressed with this group. They seem to have pretty level heads, and as far as I can tell are doing an admirable job of scientific investigation.
So why hasn't it happened?
on
Biohazard
·
· Score: 1
After reading through the article and checking out the links, the question comes to mind, "So if it's so easy... why hasn't it happened yet?"
Obviously the possibility exists that it happens all the time and we just chalk it up to a freak outbreak of a disease. But if that's not it, what's up?
According to all the available info, loads of countries and groups have the potential for using these weapons. I'm guessing that if a group or country doesn't mind using bombs on people, they wouldn't flinch at using biological weapons.
I've read about anthrax scares where someone's mailed an envelope with some vague powder and a note in it to the local abortion clinic... it's never turned out to actually be anthrax though. The Aum attack is the only confirmed recent biological weapon attack I've heard of.
So what is the deal? It sounds ludicrously simple, but something seems to keep people from using biological weapons.
Mock not the masters of our existence, they who have granted us this miraculous game! There are those who say they suck our essence, our very lives through this "game" of theirs, but we are willing servants to our lords!
[glares at the clock over her desk]
Move on, foul demon! Strike the five o'clock hour and free me from my torment! I am due in Lake Rathetear to deal with some giant skeletons, and will not take kindly to being delayed.
------------------
I'm one of those people who answered "no" to the question about drive scanning. I understand their motivation and have no problem with that, but their current hack-detection does not always work as planned - it concerns me when they automate banning of players, especially since there is no standard procedure for contesting a ban.
I'm also a die-hard evercrack junkie, and I think that the game (while having occasional flaws) is the best thing I've ever played on my computer. It was made by gamers to be what they wanted it to be... and they did an excellent job of it. As far as I'm concerned, it keeps improving. I think the idea of drive-scanning was a mistake, and I'm glad they decided against it. Frankly, they seem to be reasonable people who actually do listen to their player-base (no matter how much people whine that they don't) - and I have a lot of respect for them.
The judge is BLATANTLY hostile to the lawyers, and extraordinarily dismissive of any argument he allows them to bring. No opposition? Hrm. Opposition must mean something totally different in a legal sense. Can't they get a change of venue or something due to outrageous bias?
None of the defendants submitted any evidence in opposition to the motion
Anyone else see this? I still maintain that the injunction is unfounded, HOWEVER... what the heck happened? Did no one show up for the injunction hearing? If not, is anyone really surprised that this injunction was granted? That would be standard procedure: no objections from the defendants = injunction granted.
I have not found any articles describing the court cases with the MPAA in detail, so I have no way of knowing whether people didn't show or whether the injunction was requested in such a way that the defendants didn't find out about it in time. Does anyone know what the deal was?
Now, THAT was impressive. I personally choose to believe this version of events - it's got to be way better than the actual reality, right? Maybe we can get it linked to any new articles about SWHS or something.:) Perpetuate the mythos!
...go around to all of the art museums, demanding that they IMMEDIATELY cease and desist use of the name "Leonardo" da Vinci - clearly a copyright violation. And then, of course, they send round the police to pick up all of the infringing items... an interesting idea.
The main problem with this line of reasoning is that if your engineering team is that susceptible to being poached, you have other (major!) problems. Being listed in the credits does impart a certain sense of pride in the work... pride which might actually keep workers from taking other places' offers. I would think more companies would try to encourage that... the ones that do certainly seem to keep their employees longer.
Most ISPs would actually kick him off for overuse of bandwidth. ISPs HATE traffic. It's the bane of their existence. (At least for small ones.) Advertisers like traffic. ISPs who host advertisers that pay for their used bandwidth like traffic. Small ISPs don't get anything advantageous from more traffic, it just slows down their paying customers' connections (and connections to those customers' pages). It's hard to say what our ISP would do in his place... probably the same thing. Pull it down until we could check with a lawyer. Hell, the ISP even tried to get ahold of the guy BEFORE they pulled it (But they couldn't get ahold of him). Frankly, that shows a lot more consideration than most places would have.
And in the real world if people say, called you on the phone and said what was in those emails, you could sue for harassment. If they called your customers and said those things, you could sue for defamation. But no, this is the internet! So since it's a different medium, people are just supposed to say "Oh, well, it's just email, it really doesn't mean anything"? The internet is a means of communication, and people are just as responsible for their comments/email/etc as they are for what they say in public or on the phone.
The swastika existed in the exact same form as a nature symbol, Native American in nature I believe. It was not in any way a modified cross (I am assuming you mean "cross" in terms of the Christian symbol and not anything involving crossed lines). This non-hate symbol existed for hundreds of years before being usurped by the Nazis. So it rather falls into the same category as the trenchcoat... although to a much, much greater extent.
Leilah
(I got an SQL error the first time, so am trying to post this again... my apologies if it gets on here twice.)
Wow... I think I just had that conversation last week. It goes both ways, though...
---
Me: So... when can we upgrade the video card in this thing? Everquest won't run any of the spellcasting effects without totally crashing. And without more memory, Photoshop just drags.
Mike: Well, I wanted to upgrade the sound card in my machine first, and I need more memory too. So... you think we should upgrade the ADSL to platinum? Then Everquest would go really nicely.
Me: Ooooo.
---
I'm sure technical and non-technical people can get along, but I much prefer being able to actually participate in conversations rather than just nod-and-smile. I've been working with computers longer than he has, and he's programmed more than I have (by default - I don't program). We work out together really well. Keep looking, folks... a true geek girl is definitely worth it. Besides, you get better presents.:) "A Rio! Wow, just what I wanted!"
That's what we're trying to work on. Fixing something that was a horrible, stupid, short-sighted mistake with horrible repercussions. Something that was totally unfixable, but that we might be able to do something about now. I totally agree that the money still could be better spent in preserving the species that are currently endangered... however, you can actually get grant money for genetics whereas conservation money is hard/impossible to get. Whatever can be done should be.
...this animal is extinct for a reason.
Yes... and that reason is us. Human beings... not god. We certainly weren't concerned about playing god the first time around and I think it's shameful that such an excuse should be used as an argument against reparation. While I think that genetic experiments should be carefully thought through, I see this as an attempt to fix man's failings - or as attempt to restore god's creation if you prefer.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm glad to see that FIJA's been getting some of these things put explicitly back into the books... laws that require judges to inform juries that then can, in fact, make their decisions regardless of the law.
It's not an easy choice to make, but it is a legal choice.
That was a great article, thank you for linking it. I went looking for more information and found the Fully Informed Jury Association's home page, for anyone who's interested.
admin-us@aiusa.org That's the address for AI's US branch. I'd suggest dropping them a line, I'm working on a letter now.
... through the comments form. (I closed the window already, so I don't have the text.) I'll post if I get anything back from them... I hope they can lend a hand, he could use all the help he can get.
Because scientific papers are dead dull to someone who hasn't followed the specific field. I've read some mycology and uredinology monographs, and they're just plain hard to read if you don't know what they're trying to say. Science News does a good job at summing things up in a scientific way, but I can't imagine any of the papers I've seen would go over well in a newspaper.
Article: "Look! We've discovered that plant rust is different from this other plant rust!"
Reader: "Zzzzzz...."
A lot of libraries can't afford the exorbitant prices to get the journals... so they'll have a select few. Anything else, you just can't get. Freely available shouldn't mean "freely available to those within driving distance of an extremely well-off university library". The _large_ university I went to had issues with keeping some of these journals on the shelves due to costs. Any small university is pretty much out of luck.
Besides, the real issue here is that if scientists are going to pay for research, spend the time, write it up, edit it, etc... they should have some say as to how that information is made available. They're basically donating their time and effort to the journals, for pretty much zip in return.
I frankly can't see that taking the computer files used to publish the journal and running them through a quick web format would take even a small chunk out of the journal's profits.
*gas slowly wafts into the senate through an air vent*
"Oh my god! We're under biological attack!"
*panic ensues*
*a lone figure stands up on the podium...*
"Wait, folks! I was here the day they showed us that film strip! I KNOW JUST WHAT TO DO!"
Let's be realistic, folks. Biological terrorism is the newest scare tactic. While the potential for serious danger is obviously there... frankly this _does_ sound like the prep work for asking for more defense money. The executive branch just isn't the place that's going to be making any useful decisions about how to prevent such an attack.
I can cope with comments asking people to check the links before they post, but asking them to go read a physics book before posting? The question was well thought out and well-worded. It was a reasonable question, and it had a reasonable answer.
Geek != Physics Geek
Oooooh... memories. =) VikingMUD was the first online game I ever played, and the only MUD I really ever got into. Now if only I could remember what the heck my password was...
Having just gotten through Amnesty International's rather scathing 2000 report on the US, I'd have to agree with you there. It's scary enough what happens to actual citizens, if you come here from another country you have even fewer rights. I'm not going to argue that the US isn't a safer place than say, Chechnya, but safety's relative. If you're going to be detained in a prison for several years while the INS determines whether you're a valid refugee, for example, you might be a lot better off somewhere else.
But a biological weapon is something that can be easily concealed, and were a country or group to use it without claiming responsibility there's not really any way to trace it...
Besides which, if a small terrorist group located in, say, Afghanistan were to attack us in such a manner I'm remarkably sure that while we'd make every attempt to make them pay for such an atrocity we sure as heck wouldn't drop a nuclear bomb in an area surrounded by civilian targets. It's called trying to be "the good guys", and it limits our options (thank goodness). It's the reason terrorists like to put their headquarters in populated areas.
So what's the real deterrent for people who aren't afraid to die for their cause? Nuclear weapons just aren't a realistic option for countering terrorist attacks, they're too hard to control.
Here's the link to that page of research. Note that they don't claim it's her shoe, but give evidence from the finds and from photographs taken as she left on her voyage.
I have to say, overall I'm pretty impressed with this group. They seem to have pretty level heads, and as far as I can tell are doing an admirable job of scientific investigation.
After reading through the article and checking out the links, the question comes to mind, "So if it's so easy... why hasn't it happened yet?"
Obviously the possibility exists that it happens all the time and we just chalk it up to a freak outbreak of a disease. But if that's not it, what's up?
According to all the available info, loads of countries and groups have the potential for using these weapons. I'm guessing that if a group or country doesn't mind using bombs on people, they wouldn't flinch at using biological weapons.
I've read about anthrax scares where someone's mailed an envelope with some vague powder and a note in it to the local abortion clinic... it's never turned out to actually be anthrax though. The Aum attack is the only confirmed recent biological weapon attack I've heard of.
So what is the deal? It sounds ludicrously simple, but something seems to keep people from using biological weapons.
Mock not the masters of our existence, they who have granted us this miraculous game! There are those who say they suck our essence, our very lives through this "game" of theirs, but we are willing servants to our lords!
[glares at the clock over her desk]
Move on, foul demon! Strike the five o'clock hour and free me from my torment! I am due in Lake Rathetear to deal with some giant skeletons, and will not take kindly to being delayed.
------------------
I'm one of those people who answered "no" to the question about drive scanning. I understand their motivation and have no problem with that, but their current hack-detection does not always work as planned - it concerns me when they automate banning of players, especially since there is no standard procedure for contesting a ban.
I'm also a die-hard evercrack junkie, and I think that the game (while having occasional flaws) is the best thing I've ever played on my computer. It was made by gamers to be what they wanted it to be... and they did an excellent job of it. As far as I'm concerned, it keeps improving. I think the idea of drive-scanning was a mistake, and I'm glad they decided against it. Frankly, they seem to be reasonable people who actually do listen to their player-base (no matter how much people whine that they don't) - and I have a lot of respect for them.
Leilah
(Taerma D'Estain, 26th Erudite Paladin of Quellious, serving the Blade of Enric, Brell Serilis)
http://www.2600.com/news/2000/0121-tr ans.html
The judge is BLATANTLY hostile to the lawyers, and extraordinarily dismissive of any argument he allows them to bring. No opposition? Hrm. Opposition must mean something totally different in a legal sense. Can't they get a change of venue or something due to outrageous bias?
Leilah
Anyone else see this? I still maintain that the injunction is unfounded, HOWEVER... what the heck happened? Did no one show up for the injunction hearing? If not, is anyone really surprised that this injunction was granted? That would be standard procedure: no objections from the defendants = injunction granted.
I have not found any articles describing the court cases with the MPAA in detail, so I have no way of knowing whether people didn't show or whether the injunction was requested in such a way that the defendants didn't find out about it in time. Does anyone know what the deal was?
Leilah
http://hellstunas.org/~wench/decss
And if anyone's interested, 2600 is maintaining a registry of mirrors at:
http://www.2600.com/news/1999/1227-hel p.html
Good luck, all.
Leilah
Now, THAT was impressive. I personally choose to believe this version of events - it's got to be way better than the actual reality, right? Maybe we can get it linked to any new articles about SWHS or something. :) Perpetuate the mythos!
Leilah
...go around to all of the art museums, demanding that they IMMEDIATELY cease and desist use of the name "Leonardo" da Vinci - clearly a copyright violation. And then, of course, they send round the police to pick up all of the infringing items... an interesting idea.
Leilah
The main problem with this line of reasoning is that if your engineering team is that susceptible to being poached, you have other (major!) problems. Being listed in the credits does impart a certain sense of pride in the work... pride which might actually keep workers from taking other places' offers. I would think more companies would try to encourage that... the ones that do certainly seem to keep their employees longer.
Leilah
Yup, I like BeOS more every day. Glad someplace still thinks credits are important.
Leilah
Most ISPs would actually kick him off for overuse of bandwidth. ISPs HATE traffic. It's the bane of their existence. (At least for small ones.) Advertisers like traffic. ISPs who host advertisers that pay for their used bandwidth like traffic. Small ISPs don't get anything advantageous from more traffic, it just slows down their paying customers' connections (and connections to those customers' pages). It's hard to say what our ISP would do in his place... probably the same thing. Pull it down until we could check with a lawyer. Hell, the ISP even tried to get ahold of the guy BEFORE they pulled it (But they couldn't get ahold of him). Frankly, that shows a lot more consideration than most places would have.
And in the real world if people say, called you on the phone and said what was in those emails, you could sue for harassment. If they called your customers and said those things, you could sue for defamation. But no, this is the internet! So since it's a different medium, people are just supposed to say "Oh, well, it's just email, it really doesn't mean anything"? The internet is a means of communication, and people are just as responsible for their comments/email/etc as they are for what they say in public or on the phone.
Leilah
The swastika existed in the exact same form as a nature symbol, Native American in nature I believe. It was not in any way a modified cross (I am assuming you mean "cross" in terms of the Christian symbol and not anything involving crossed lines). This non-hate symbol existed for hundreds of years before being usurped by the Nazis. So it rather falls into the same category as the trenchcoat... although to a much, much greater extent.
Leilah
(I got an SQL error the first time, so am trying to post this again... my apologies if it gets on here twice.)
Wow... I think I just had that conversation last week. It goes both ways, though...
:) "A Rio! Wow, just what I wanted!"
---
Me: So... when can we upgrade the video card in this thing? Everquest won't run any of the spellcasting effects without totally crashing. And without more memory, Photoshop just drags.
Mike: Well, I wanted to upgrade the sound card in my machine first, and I need more memory too. So... you think we should upgrade the ADSL to platinum? Then Everquest would go really nicely.
Me: Ooooo.
---
I'm sure technical and non-technical people can get along, but I much prefer being able to actually participate in conversations rather than just nod-and-smile. I've been working with computers longer than he has, and he's programmed more than I have (by default - I don't program). We work out together really well. Keep looking, folks... a true geek girl is definitely worth it. Besides, you get better presents.
Leilah
That's what we're trying to work on. Fixing something that was a horrible, stupid, short-sighted mistake with horrible repercussions. Something that was totally unfixable, but that we might be able to do something about now. I totally agree that the money still could be better spent in preserving the species that are currently endangered... however, you can actually get grant money for genetics whereas conservation money is hard/impossible to get. Whatever can be done should be.
Yes... and that reason is us. Human beings... not god. We certainly weren't concerned about playing god the first time around and I think it's shameful that such an excuse should be used as an argument against reparation. While I think that genetic experiments should be carefully thought through, I see this as an attempt to fix man's failings - or as attempt to restore god's creation if you prefer.
Leilah