I was going to vote for the lesser of two evils. But then I was suddenly reminded that they really are evil. So now I'm going to vote for the greater of two evils. That'll teach 'em! Now they know that if they want my vote they'll have to be less evil.
the kind of people that will get paid/studied to watch hard core porn for weeks are the kind of people that already have sexual callousness.
I have not read the study but if done correctly there would be a control condition to compare with. Typically, the study would take all of the subjects and randomly place half of them in the control group while the rest go into the test group. At the conclusion of the study they check to see if there is a statistically significant difference between the people in the test group and the people in the control group. If the study was well designed it would also be double-blind. The person/people gathering the results would not know which group each subject was in. So assuming the study was done properly it is not valid to debunk it based on self-selection.
Konqueror has this functionality built into the location bar. To search Google, just type "gg: search phrase". To search wikipedia, type "wp: search phrase". Forgot what Moore's law is? "fd:Moore's law". Someone created a new search engine? You can add your own shortcuts.
You can even set a default search engine. In that case anything that doesn't look like a valid URL goes to the default search engine. To top that off, you can select text, then middle-click on the background and it will be just like tossing the text into the location bar and pressing return. You can select a phrase from a web page and middle click to instantly run a web search on the phrase. It's one of Konqueror's coolest features.
Be 21 years of age or older, have a High School Diploma or its equivalent GED certificate, a valid Driver's License, the physical strength and agility sufficient to perform law enforcement work.
In Minnesota, police need a license from the state. There are three ways to get a license. Two of them require a college degree (only two years). If the degree is in the wrong field they must also complete a certificate program. To get a license without a degree, officers can move from another jurisdiction where they have five years experience in law enforcement.
Minnesota police also have to maintain physical standards, pass a psychological evaluation, not have any felony convictions or any of a long list of lesser convictions.
They must also complete 48 continuing education credits every three years.
Despite those rules, a suicidal man died today after St. Paul police used a taser on him.
I can think of any number of explanations off the top of my head to explain those circumstances.
Yes. There's plenty of potential explanations but Hans Reiser took the stand and removed all doubt. If any of the explanations you can think of were actually true Hans would have mentioned them when he testified. Instead he presented a long string of lies that the jury saw right through.
It took six months to present all of the evidence in this case. Closing arguments took more than a week. I just listed the highlights. For example, the prosecuter presented some pretty compelling evidence that Nina is dead, but it is not listed among my highlights.
Books and Web searches on murder and homicide investigations.
The books were purchased after Nina disappeared. The receipt was in the car.
Aside from a hypothetical comment from a random Joe on a blog I haven't heard anything about web searches on murder or homicide. The prosecution obtained Reiser's hard drives only two weeks before testimony ended. The defense called the police's computer expert to testify about the contents of the drives.
There was some doubt. Then Hans' insisted on taking the stand. The jury may have considered perhaps Hans took the seat out to go racing or make room for a large purchase. But if that were the case he would have said so on the stand. The same goes for any other evidence. Because Reiser took the stand the jury couldn't conjour up possible explanations. If Reiser didn't present the doubt himself the jury couldn't consider it. Since it was obvious Reiser was lying (he even admitted to it) the jury couldn't believe what he had to say.
1. Reiser showed up at his childrens' school the day after Labor day, the first school day after Nina disappeared and a day when Nina was supposed to pick up the kids. The prosecuter claims he was making sure the police didn't show up to ask where the kids' mother was. Reiser claims he went there to add his mother, Beverly Palmer, to the list of people that could pick up the kids. He was scheduled to pick up the kids the next day.
2. Hans' Honda CRX was missing the front passenger seat. It went missing sometime after he got a speeding ticket (after Nina disappeared) and before the police seized the vehicle.
3. Hans admits his hosed out the inside of the car. He removed the seat and threw it away. He also removed the carpet and disposed of it.
4. The car was also missing a piece of trim that Hans admits to throwing out.
5. Han's admits he was trying to hide the car from the police.
6. Nina's van was found three miles from Hans' home. Her cell phone was found in the van with the battery removed.
7. When Hans was taken into custody his cell phone did not have a battery in it. On the stand he claimed that he did not remove the battery from his own phone. He later admitted he lied about that. He actually removed it frequently after Nina disappeared.
8. Along with his cell phone, Hans was carrying his passport and several thousand dollars in cash.
9. Reiser was seen hosing down the driveway to his mother's home shortly after Nina disappeared.
10. The police found two books on murder in Reiser's car. He had purchased them with cash shortly after Nina disappeared.
11. He paid a $5,000 retainer to a criminal defense attorney just days after Nina disappeared, while the investigation was still a missing person's case. He didn't even bother to try calling her to find out if she was alive before he shelled out for the retainer.
My personal opinion is that Hans killed Nina in a fit of rage, then scrambled to cover up the evidence. I did not see any evidence whatsoever of premeditation. So I can not at all understand how this jury reached a verdict of First degree murder.
Their main selling point is longevity. You can store the data on a disk and read it back 50 years from now. Will this company even exist 50 years from now? Will anyone have the equipment to read one of these disks in 50 years? Have they published the specs so you can construct your own equipment, should it become necessary? I don't see this working out. Archiving needs to be done with well-known open standards. InPhase doesn't seem to be off to a very good start in that respect.
This $600 stimulus package, however IS a dumb waste of money. Give my family $1200 in May so you can come at me in April for $1400. That money comes from somewhere...
That's not how it works. The government will borrow that $1200 and come at you every April for the rest of your life for $60.
Democrats and Republicans do not always vote in one big block either.
They frequently vote as a block because they face repercussions within their own party if they break ranks. Consider a case in Minnesota where six Republicans were booted from their committee leadership assignments for breaking ranks. Their own party could have gone further, such as removing them from committees altogether, cutting their staff, or refusing to endorse them at caucuses.
This is quite possibly the worst idea the record companies have ever come up with.
The Electronic Frontier Foundation proposed this idea years ago. The record labels opposed it back then. It was a bad idea when it first came up and it's still a bad idea now (at least the EFF proposal was voluntary).
The DMCA takedown notice has amateur written all over it. From the notice:
I hereby certify under penalty of perjury that the information in this notice is accurate...
Nobody says that because the law doesn't require it. The law only requires the lawyer to state under penalty of perjury that they represent the person/organization they claim to represent. The rest of the notice only has to be made with a good-faith belief that it is accurate.
She also states:
I have a good faith belief that none of the materials or activities listed above has been authorized by the U.S. Air Force, its agents, or the law.
The Air Force actually asked Wired to publish the video. Their own website even claims it may be copied and distributed. The takedown notice was supposed to go through the Air Force marketing cheif's office but never did. I suspect Ms Pikser isn't the most qualified of lawyers.
You need to view it from the position of the content producers since they are really the ones picking what format they will distribute on.
- VHS vs. BetaMax: Cheaper, better system won. VHS was 'better' because the quality dropped with each copy.
- 8 Track vs. Cassette: Cheaper, better system won.
- BR vs. HDDVD: More expensive, better system won. BR is 'better' because it has an extra level of content protection.
I mean, if we get rid of drug patents, AIDS research isn't going to go away, but there's sure going to be a lot less of it.
Can you be sure of that? Most basic medical research is financed with government funds. Pharmaceutical companies generally finance only the last step of the research. That is, they do the testing necessary to bring a promising drug to market. Certainly if pharmaceuticals didn't handle the last step other sources would open up--likely more government funding. If that were the case it seems likely to me many more drugs would be studied including many that pharmaceuticals wouldn't bother with.
One also needs to factor in roadblocks to research when scientists hide their work until they can file for a patent. And consider the extra costs researchers encounter when they have to pay royalties on patented research techniques and patented source materials.
How about channels of high definition video? High def television broadcasts are 20 Mbps. So this technology can simultaneously transfer 820,000 high def channels over a single optical fiber.
From reading Mr. Gregerson's web site it seems like the defendant changed his side of the story. He originally claimed Mr. Zubitskiy sold him the photos. He later claimed Mr. Gregerson hired Mr. Zubitskiy. That Mr. Gregerson's co-conspirator sold him the photos then Mr. Gregerson came back and demanded more money for allegedly infringing copyright.
This is what I love about the law. One side always makes up a remarkable and entertaining story.
To use eminent domain on a patent is to reinforce the notion that patents are property rather than an exclusive right. Congress doesn't even have the authority to do this. If our forefathers wanted congress to grant money to inventors they would have placed that power in the constitution. Instead they carefully limited what congress could do:
To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries
There is nothing in that statement about congress purchasing someone's rights.
Consider another intellectual right. Congress has retroactively extended copyrights with every copyright extension in history. Certainly they should be able to retroactively shorten it. But if that day ever comes copyright holders are going to start screaming eminent domain.
So there's some money to be made in copyright arbitrage? You know, go to europe, make a bunch of copies of Elvis recordings, import them into the US and sell them for $0.99 at gas station check outs? That's legal right?
The copyright holder has an exclusive right to distribute the work. Once the first sale occurs that right goes away for that particular copy. I believe the copyright holder would argue the first sale occurs when they allow it to. I assume this would be the same as if Lord of the Rings were copied in Ethopia (which has no copyright treaty with the U.S.) and imported into the country.
Anonymity and privacy were features that were built in.
We also have electronic cash which uses zero-knowledge systems to protect privacy. Note real implementations are far more sophisticated than the simple example at Wikipedia. The only information you can get from the cash is the information necessary to prove it has been paid to you.
I find it ironic you say Bush didn't protect and defend the Constitution of the USA
Wow. You come up with one case where he may have done something in compliance with the constitution. Rest assured if his backers wanted that bill signed he would have signed it regardless of the constitution. The man has spent most of his presidency making a mockery of the constitution.
He has:
Suspended habeas corpus in violation of Article I, section 9 of the constitution.
Donated funds to "faith based" organizations in violation of the first amendment.
Conducted widespread surveillance on millions of phone calls and internet communications without a warrant in violation of the fourth amendment.
Barred prisoners from having a trial in violation of the fifth amendment.
He has violated every single provision of the sixth amendment.
Had people tortured in violation of the fifth and eighth amendments.
"and frankly, I'm starting to get more than a bit sick of the copyright creeps demanding that all society and technology bend over backwards to help them profit." And that's where I take issue.
DeCSS was ruled illegal thus making it illegal to publish an open source DVD player. You don't take issue with that? In fact it is illegal to make any open source media player that can play DRM'd material.
Hollywood has been lobbying for laws that would
Require all video cameras to stop recording when a certain watermark comes into view.
Require ISPs to monitor all traffic and block anything that looks like copyrighted material.
Force internet radio stations to pay higher royalties on music--retroactively! This one actually passed and became law.
Prohibit VCRs from recording anything with a "don't copy" bit set.
Require all VCRs to support a proprietary, patented copy protection standard (passed and became law in 1998).
And a lot more. Take a look at The Right to Read for some older and similarily egregious examples.
Copyright is supposed to provide authors with a short-term (for limited times) benefit with the goal of enriching the public domain. Material that is effectively protected by DRM can never enter the public domain which defeats the whole point of copyright.
Slashdot Mirror
I have not read the study but if done correctly there would be a control condition to compare with. Typically, the study would take all of the subjects and randomly place half of them in the control group while the rest go into the test group. At the conclusion of the study they check to see if there is a statistically significant difference between the people in the test group and the people in the control group. If the study was well designed it would also be double-blind. The person/people gathering the results would not know which group each subject was in. So assuming the study was done properly it is not valid to debunk it based on self-selection.
You can even set a default search engine. In that case anything that doesn't look like a valid URL goes to the default search engine. To top that off, you can select text, then middle-click on the background and it will be just like tossing the text into the location bar and pressing return. You can select a phrase from a web page and middle click to instantly run a web search on the phrase. It's one of Konqueror's coolest features.
In Minnesota, police need a license from the state. There are three ways to get a license. Two of them require a college degree (only two years). If the degree is in the wrong field they must also complete a certificate program. To get a license without a degree, officers can move from another jurisdiction where they have five years experience in law enforcement.
Minnesota police also have to maintain physical standards, pass a psychological evaluation, not have any felony convictions or any of a long list of lesser convictions.
They must also complete 48 continuing education credits every three years.
Despite those rules, a suicidal man died today after St. Paul police used a taser on him.
Yes. There's plenty of potential explanations but Hans Reiser took the stand and removed all doubt. If any of the explanations you can think of were actually true Hans would have mentioned them when he testified. Instead he presented a long string of lies that the jury saw right through.
It took six months to present all of the evidence in this case. Closing arguments took more than a week. I just listed the highlights. For example, the prosecuter presented some pretty compelling evidence that Nina is dead, but it is not listed among my highlights.
The books were purchased after Nina disappeared. The receipt was in the car.
Aside from a hypothetical comment from a random Joe on a blog I haven't heard anything about web searches on murder or homicide. The prosecution obtained Reiser's hard drives only two weeks before testimony ended. The defense called the police's computer expert to testify about the contents of the drives.
There was some doubt. Then Hans' insisted on taking the stand. The jury may have considered perhaps Hans took the seat out to go racing or make room for a large purchase. But if that were the case he would have said so on the stand. The same goes for any other evidence. Because Reiser took the stand the jury couldn't conjour up possible explanations. If Reiser didn't present the doubt himself the jury couldn't consider it. Since it was obvious Reiser was lying (he even admitted to it) the jury couldn't believe what he had to say.
My personal opinion is that Hans killed Nina in a fit of rage, then scrambled to cover up the evidence. I did not see any evidence whatsoever of premeditation. So I can not at all understand how this jury reached a verdict of First degree murder.
Their main selling point is longevity. You can store the data on a disk and read it back 50 years from now. Will this company even exist 50 years from now? Will anyone have the equipment to read one of these disks in 50 years? Have they published the specs so you can construct your own equipment, should it become necessary? I don't see this working out. Archiving needs to be done with well-known open standards. InPhase doesn't seem to be off to a very good start in that respect.
That's not how it works. The government will borrow that $1200 and come at you every April for the rest of your life for $60.
They frequently vote as a block because they face repercussions within their own party if they break ranks. Consider a case in Minnesota where six Republicans were booted from their committee leadership assignments for breaking ranks. Their own party could have gone further, such as removing them from committees altogether, cutting their staff, or refusing to endorse them at caucuses.
The Electronic Frontier Foundation proposed this idea years ago. The record labels opposed it back then. It was a bad idea when it first came up and it's still a bad idea now (at least the EFF proposal was voluntary).
They have.
Nobody says that because the law doesn't require it. The law only requires the lawyer to state under penalty of perjury that they represent the person/organization they claim to represent. The rest of the notice only has to be made with a good-faith belief that it is accurate.
She also states:
The Air Force actually asked Wired to publish the video. Their own website even claims it may be copied and distributed. The takedown notice was supposed to go through the Air Force marketing cheif's office but never did. I suspect Ms Pikser isn't the most qualified of lawyers.
- VHS vs. BetaMax: Cheaper, better system won. VHS was 'better' because the quality dropped with each copy.
- 8 Track vs. Cassette: Cheaper, better system won.
- BR vs. HDDVD: More expensive, better system won. BR is 'better' because it has an extra level of content protection.
Can you be sure of that? Most basic medical research is financed with government funds. Pharmaceutical companies generally finance only the last step of the research. That is, they do the testing necessary to bring a promising drug to market. Certainly if pharmaceuticals didn't handle the last step other sources would open up--likely more government funding. If that were the case it seems likely to me many more drugs would be studied including many that pharmaceuticals wouldn't bother with.
One also needs to factor in roadblocks to research when scientists hide their work until they can file for a patent. And consider the extra costs researchers encounter when they have to pay royalties on patented research techniques and patented source materials.
How about channels of high definition video? High def television broadcasts are 20 Mbps. So this technology can simultaneously transfer 820,000 high def channels over a single optical fiber.
This is what I love about the law. One side always makes up a remarkable and entertaining story.
There is nothing in that statement about congress purchasing someone's rights.
Consider another intellectual right. Congress has retroactively extended copyrights with every copyright extension in history. Certainly they should be able to retroactively shorten it. But if that day ever comes copyright holders are going to start screaming eminent domain.
The copyright holder has an exclusive right to distribute the work. Once the first sale occurs that right goes away for that particular copy. I believe the copyright holder would argue the first sale occurs when they allow it to. I assume this would be the same as if Lord of the Rings were copied in Ethopia (which has no copyright treaty with the U.S.) and imported into the country.
We also have electronic cash which uses zero-knowledge systems to protect privacy. Note real implementations are far more sophisticated than the simple example at Wikipedia. The only information you can get from the cash is the information necessary to prove it has been paid to you.
With at least 36 ads lined up averaging 30 seconds each that comes out to $97.2 million.
it's really hard to make a profit on the Super Bowl.
With money like that it would be really hard not to make a profit. Now if the teams actually payed for their own stadiums...
Wow. You come up with one case where he may have done something in compliance with the constitution. Rest assured if his backers wanted that bill signed he would have signed it regardless of the constitution. The man has spent most of his presidency making a mockery of the constitution.
He has:
And that's where I take issue.
DeCSS was ruled illegal thus making it illegal to publish an open source DVD player. You don't take issue with that? In fact it is illegal to make any open source media player that can play DRM'd material.
Hollywood has been lobbying for laws that would
Copyright is supposed to provide authors with a short-term (for limited times) benefit with the goal of enriching the public domain. Material that is effectively protected by DRM can never enter the public domain which defeats the whole point of copyright.
The Wikipedia page associated with that image indicates it was just a cost saving measure.