Too bad that most Western law insists that the law apply equally to everyone. Lawmakers would write simply the greatest laws . . . if they themselves didn't have to be bound by them.
We'd have the greatest family values, the greatest IP protection, the greatest right to life . . .
If only the lawmakers could be above the laws . . .
You couldn't ban digital manipulation of photos used in advertising.
Advertising speech gets first amendment protection, albeit not as much protection as policical speech, for example. But it does get protection.
One obvious First Amendment problem that you run into is overbreadth.
There are a lot of good uses for Photoshop in advertising--like making really cool surrealistic advertising videos, for example. Such videos are not misleading and there is no legitimate interest in regulating them. Any law that would bar their production merely because they were digitally created would violate the First Amendment.
No. You completely misunderstand. Access was FREE, like it is in the courthouse. The big difference is that you can't install a Perl script on a federal court's computer, but you can install a Perl script on your local library's computer if they don't mind.
PACER has a little RECAP warning (at least as of last week). I forget most of it, but part of it warns users that it is open source and may contain bad software in it. I thought that was pretty funny.
You get the sense that the judges don't like it one bit, but they are being very circumspect in their language.
Maybe the judges are letting the FBI do their talking for them . . .
This isn't about the FCC (Federal Communications Commission). It's about the Federal Trade Commission--the FTC.
A blogger is one thing and an advertiser is another. Getting paid in exchange for publishing advertising copy is definitely something that is (and should be regulated).
Stargate worked because of Macgyver. His wry humor made it easy to take the logic faults of the show. Tilc also evolved into a very interesting character.
But in the end, it was Macgyver who made Stargate. If Lou Diamond Phillips doesn't end up being as wooden as Edward James Olmos, I'll be (pleasantly) shocked. The good space shows need to have an actor who can portray inspirational leadership. People would follow Macgyver, Kirk, Picard, or Janeway anywhere. Avery Brooks and Scott Bakula, not so much.
Nonsense. They'll sell and sell and sell. And profit and profit and profit.
Patents are only for a limited amount of time. The only way to exploit the patent (unless its a defensive patent) is to market it. You market it at the highest price the market will bear and then you reap the profits.
When the patent lapses, then the prices really drop.
Nonsense. Malware writers will then target Linux. If you think Linux is inherently more secure than Windows, you're absolutely nuts. Windows computers are where the people are, and more importantly--are where the money is. If Linux becomes the place where the people and money are, Linux will have its own legion of malware writers . . . and obnoxious antivirus software manufacturers.
Americans eat crap. Crap that makes them obese. Crap that makes them die earlier than they need to.
That doesn't bother me much. We suffer the consequences of our diet decisions.
But this kind of activity forces food manufacturers to put more better foods in the market place. That's good for me. So I like it. I don't want to eat the garbage anyway.
I don't think anybody can fairly doubt that someday a suicidal, sociopathic person is going to create a biological weapon with the potential to wipe out humanity. It is also quite plain that there are people out there quite willing to use such a weapon.
You can regulate the tools to make such an awful weapon, but then there is always some dictator somewhere who needs money to fund his sybaritic lifestyle. He'll sell the evil tools to somebody else. Alternatively, the same tools used to genetically attack the species will also be used to genetically aid the species--more than we can even now imagine. When genetic treatment gets so helpful, the double-edged tools will be widely distributed.
And then you have power-seekers who derive satisfaction from peddling fear and projecting power. That crew can never get anything done (excepting the horror of war).
Seems to me that species survival requires either global communal unity or a diaspora from Earth. Neither of those is likely to happen. When Israel grants equal rights to resident Arabs, and Iranian women obtain rights of self-determination, then I'll reconsider my pessimism.
Civil contempt means that the person who is locked up holds the keys to the jailhouse doors in his or her own hands. Comply and be freed. Stay defiant and stay locked up. If you don't like it, you can appeal.
Courts wouldn't work without civil contempt sanction.
There's a lot of misinformation in this thread being paraded as fact.
The scope of available restitution is defined by statute. The only limitations on statutory restitution are imposed by state and federal constitutions.
Contrary to some of the nonsense spouted here, in California (in re Jeremiah F.), a burglar may be ordered to pay for the cost of a burglar alarm in a (previously unalarmed) house that he burglarized and the Montana Supreme Court has authorized restitution for enhanced security (State v. Thompson). These two instances are cited to show that the States get a LOT of leeway in establishing how restitution is determined.
Thieves and hackers are the people responsible for this need for enhanced security. I say make them pay for it as much as they possibly can!
In at least North Carolina, a burglary victim is entitled to receive money sufficient for a burglar alarm as restitution.
Many laws ARE written like "IF(this) THEN (that). Very many laws are written that way--especially regulatory laws and criminal laws. Your tax law, for example, has many provisions within it that can easily be translated into language that can be programmed into a computer. Don't forget that many statutes are written by government bureaucrats with computers. They want computer-friendly statutes to make their jobs more efficient. Legislators are often responsive when such laws are proposed.
"Gray" areas are created only when legislators (intentionally or not) pass on the job of law-writing to the judges. The most efficient law eliminates or minimizes the gray areas.
But it should be noted that the rural populace has inherent mobilization problems in any time of political instability. It's much easier for the city folk to mobilize for revolt.
Bicyclists depend on audible cues from traffic. Please keep the sound on. Sometimes you can hear a stupid driver and take defensive action immediately. Silent death is a bad thing.
Slashdot Mirror
Too bad that most Western law insists that the law apply equally to everyone. Lawmakers would write simply the greatest laws . . . if they themselves didn't have to be bound by them.
We'd have the greatest family values, the greatest IP protection, the greatest right to life . . .
If only the lawmakers could be above the laws . . .
You couldn't ban digital manipulation of photos used in advertising.
Advertising speech gets first amendment protection, albeit not as much protection as policical speech, for example. But it does get protection.
One obvious First Amendment problem that you run into is overbreadth.
There are a lot of good uses for Photoshop in advertising--like making really cool surrealistic advertising videos, for example. Such videos are not misleading and there is no legitimate interest in regulating them. Any law that would bar their production merely because they were digitally created would violate the First Amendment.
Not original. Search the last half of the phrase and you'll find it on Wikipedia.
It's funny, but pity Lord Lode who has to plagiarize to get attention.
Wow! Great post! When are you starting your next conspiracy story?
Authority is a wimpy force when compared to INFLUENCE. Cheney had massive INFLUENCE over the military--and Cheney RETAINED his Halliburton stock.
No. You completely misunderstand. Access was FREE, like it is in the courthouse. The big difference is that you can't install a Perl script on a federal court's computer, but you can install a Perl script on your local library's computer if they don't mind.
NO. RTFA.
He installed a Perl script on a LIBRARY computer.
PACER has a little RECAP warning (at least as of last week). I forget most of it, but part of it warns users that it is open source and may contain bad software in it. I thought that was pretty funny.
You get the sense that the judges don't like it one bit, but they are being very circumspect in their language.
Maybe the judges are letting the FBI do their talking for them . . .
This isn't about the FCC (Federal Communications Commission). It's about the Federal Trade Commission--the FTC.
A blogger is one thing and an advertiser is another. Getting paid in exchange for publishing advertising copy is definitely something that is (and should be regulated).
Stargate worked because of Macgyver. His wry humor made it easy to take the logic faults of the show. Tilc also evolved into a very interesting character.
But in the end, it was Macgyver who made Stargate. If Lou Diamond Phillips doesn't end up being as wooden as Edward James Olmos, I'll be (pleasantly) shocked. The good space shows need to have an actor who can portray inspirational leadership. People would follow Macgyver, Kirk, Picard, or Janeway anywhere. Avery Brooks and Scott Bakula, not so much.
More like the Hindenburg Administration, but that's another story.
Nonsense. They'll sell and sell and sell. And profit and profit and profit.
Patents are only for a limited amount of time. The only way to exploit the patent (unless its a defensive patent) is to market it. You market it at the highest price the market will bear and then you reap the profits.
When the patent lapses, then the prices really drop.
Tech like this really is a win win.
Nonsense. Malware writers will then target Linux. If you think Linux is inherently more secure than Windows, you're absolutely nuts. Windows computers are where the people are, and more importantly--are where the money is. If Linux becomes the place where the people and money are, Linux will have its own legion of malware writers . . . and obnoxious antivirus software manufacturers.
Americans eat crap. Crap that makes them obese. Crap that makes them die earlier than they need to.
That doesn't bother me much. We suffer the consequences of our diet decisions.
But this kind of activity forces food manufacturers to put more better foods in the market place. That's good for me. So I like it. I don't want to eat the garbage anyway.
Unlimited freedom promotes abuse of freedom!!!
I don't think anybody can fairly doubt that someday a suicidal, sociopathic person is going to create a biological weapon with the potential to wipe out humanity. It is also quite plain that there are people out there quite willing to use such a weapon.
You can regulate the tools to make such an awful weapon, but then there is always some dictator somewhere who needs money to fund his sybaritic lifestyle. He'll sell the evil tools to somebody else. Alternatively, the same tools used to genetically attack the species will also be used to genetically aid the species--more than we can even now imagine. When genetic treatment gets so helpful, the double-edged tools will be widely distributed.
And then you have power-seekers who derive satisfaction from peddling fear and projecting power. That crew can never get anything done (excepting the horror of war).
Seems to me that species survival requires either global communal unity or a diaspora from Earth. Neither of those is likely to happen. When Israel grants equal rights to resident Arabs, and Iranian women obtain rights of self-determination, then I'll reconsider my pessimism.
Civil contempt means that the person who is locked up holds the keys to the jailhouse doors in his or her own hands. Comply and be freed. Stay defiant and stay locked up. If you don't like it, you can appeal.
Courts wouldn't work without civil contempt sanction.
Disregard the last sentence. It's inadvertent.
There's a lot of misinformation in this thread being paraded as fact.
The scope of available restitution is defined by statute. The only limitations on statutory restitution are imposed by state and federal constitutions.
Contrary to some of the nonsense spouted here, in California (in re Jeremiah F.), a burglar may be ordered to pay for the cost of a burglar alarm in a (previously unalarmed) house that he burglarized and the Montana Supreme Court has authorized restitution for enhanced security (State v. Thompson). These two instances are cited to show that the States get a LOT of leeway in establishing how restitution is determined.
Thieves and hackers are the people responsible for this need for enhanced security. I say make them pay for it as much as they possibly can!
In at least North Carolina, a burglary victim is entitled to receive money sufficient for a burglar alarm as restitution.
Many laws ARE written like "IF(this) THEN (that). Very many laws are written that way--especially regulatory laws and criminal laws. Your tax law, for example, has many provisions within it that can easily be translated into language that can be programmed into a computer. Don't forget that many statutes are written by government bureaucrats with computers. They want computer-friendly statutes to make their jobs more efficient. Legislators are often responsive when such laws are proposed.
"Gray" areas are created only when legislators (intentionally or not) pass on the job of law-writing to the judges. The most efficient law eliminates or minimizes the gray areas.
These links are all just speculation and fluff. There's no news in any of the articles. Don't waste your time RTFA.
FYI
But it should be noted that the rural populace has inherent mobilization problems in any time of political instability. It's much easier for the city folk to mobilize for revolt.
Bicyclists depend on audible cues from traffic. Please keep the sound on. Sometimes you can hear a stupid driver and take defensive action immediately.
Silent death is a bad thing.
Is anybody familiar with what it takes to make a good wood case?
A Microsoft refusal to support a really cool netbook technology would be a good opening for Linux.