Great. We now have police telling people they're asking too many questions and arresting people for it.
4 of them couldn't remove him without a tazer? And then they had to arrest him? God...take him outside, dump him on the ground and close the doors. But let's be realistic - anyone who disagrees with the police state must be arrested.
You talk past an allotted time, you get tazered. That would sure clean the idiots who babble on about nonsense. "FOR TEH CHILDREN....!!!!!11!!111oneoneone"
"I'm sorry senator, we're tired of hearing you. Please step down" "Sorry, but i'm not releasing the floor until you address my issue with shoe laces poisioning parakeets in indonesia" "Ok, we warned you. Go get em boys" "Ahh what..ZZZZzzzzzZZZZZZzzzzz..noooo...ZZZZZzzzzzZZZZZzzzz...please...ZZZZZZzzzzZZZZZzzzz..." "And on to the next topic. Discuss raises for the senate."
Disturbing the peace...is such an insane 'crime'. It's a bullshit charge that allows police to tack on the 'resisting arrest' that they love to throw around.
Disturbing the peace could be farting in a library. It could be mowing your lawn at 8AM or when your neighbor happens to be having a 12 hour 'gathering' for... whatever. Now granted,i'm sure there are some general definitions but if asking more questions that someone deemed appropriate at a Q&A forum is disturbing the peace...we're in trouble. Besides that, everyone WAS peaceful until the officers physically restrained HIM. Heck, the officers were even told that the question WOULD be answered.
The insanity that surrounds anything tied to a president or president-hopeful blows my mind. Freedom is speech is good...just not when it's around my presidental campaign, speech, etc.? If the people feel the need to rally, rant, chant, boo, hold signs, or whatever... it should be allowed and accomodated. The president does work for the PEOPLE, right? Right? Erm, hello? Anyone...? Darn, i knew i shouldn't have let them put my soapbox in the basement of a barn in michigan for the FL rally. At least i got my free speech...
That advice is useless for anything other than new construction. Not only that, but it's incredibly difficult to design a NORMAL house with NORMAL building materials to be termite-proof. You realize they can get through something basically the size of a pinhole? They can and will eat sheetrock. They fit through small cracks in a cement foundation. They will build tunnels up the walls of a raised foundation to reach wood. You need a perfectly sealed house with no exterior wood. I suppose i could build a medevil castle. Oh, and they fly.
Yeah, but show me a single chemical that's as effective and long lasting at killing the friggin termites that have been munching on my house in years past!
I wish i could still get my hands on some DDT - one treatment would keep my house safe for 10-20 years easily. Much better than the 2-5 year chemicals they use now with those retarded 'bait' traps.
Public information means what it says... information that is freely available to the public. Period. If you think there is security in making it more difficult to obtain you're delusional.
It's like saying "free speech!!!" and then turning around and expecting someone to excercise that right only in their basement. At a whisper. When alone.
If it's public information it should be readily available. Furthermore, if it's PUBLIC INFORMATION how can you reasonable claim copyright?! That's pure insanity. Who holds the copyright? The public? Go futher, it's information - *not* an artistic work of any sort. What will they try now, patent it?
How about skipping the phone-home-to-install and going with 'authentication for updates' scheme?
Require a CD Key like most do for installs. Anything more than that becomes a headache for both the owner and the seller. it highly depends on your target audience and you have to consider that SOME piracy is a good thing. Call it advertizing and you break even. If your product is so good that 500,000 people will steal it then want updates and bug fixes...then you can add a big chunk of those as new sales.
Giving things away is not always the same as giving away profits.
See, you assume your version of the hypothetical future is the only outcome. Society has proven that if there's a way to make money, someone will. If you can't see any POSSIBLE way for someone to make money...someone you can't see WILL make money.
How about this scenario. Abolish "copyright law" as it stands. Allow companies to develow a REAL, EFFECTIVE DRM system. To take your laughable Halo 3... do honestly thing that *copyright law* will prevent illegal duplication of the game? Erm...i don't think so. I think MS's DRM and ability to prevent updates, online play, etc. via their XBLive service will keep FAR FAR more people away from copied games than copyright law.
Abolishing copyright laws would kill off many companies. Many others would take their place. How about a company (companies?) to provide real-time DRM, authentication, etc.? This way, if it's yours you're guaranteed to have access to install and use it where ever you go. Internet connectivity is not universally available yet but... i'm also not going to solve copyright/DRM for the world in a/. post.
Basically copyright has managed to re-direct the task of protecting a companies work from the company itself to the court system. "Well your honor, yes we made a full version available to download but it specifically stated that you had to pay $50 up-front or $50,000 after 60 days. As such, we're requesting $50,000 in damanged plus legal fees plus $billions in penalty.
Or how about "our laughable drm depended on microsoft's autorun feature in windows so we're going to sue someone for posting in a forum that holding the shift key 'breaks' our DRM. It's breaking encryption/DRM and thus illegal to publish via the DMCA."
The thought that an idea or information can be illegal is...just beyond stupid if you ask me.
Copyright is useful to some...in some ways...sometimes. It also has many bad aspects and could be replaced.
Make information illegal and only criminals will have that information.
Is it me or does this sound like the first chapter in several books they made us read in high school (appologies to those too young for HS) where books are banned, information is all protected, "citizens" are not permitted anything that might be dangerous, offensive...and i think one of them had people eating generic paste goo or somethign for food.
WAKE UP. If some idiot kid wants to make a chlorine bomb and kills himself because mommy and daddy figured the internet was a good babysitter like the TV is (was?) and paid no attention...blame THEM! Same parents that would take him to buy chlorine tabs at the pool store without asking why...and then blame the 'net.
UGH...why not just justify it all "FOR THE CHILDREN...."
wtb freedom of speech. Who are you to determine what speech is good vs. bad? Let people say what they want! You have the same power/freedom yourself.
If someone tells me that i suck and provides no reason, i find that easier to defend against than someone pointing out actual flaws anyhow! I could simply state that i don't suck and the OP is a doody-head. BFD. Everyone needs to grow up.
Granted this is in australia...and granted they're sueing the FORUM - not the poster. I doubt a court would allow the suit in the US...providers have been given protection against content posted or sent by individuals (i.e. you can't sue an ISP because someone send a child pron through their system).
Ha. How about the 15 minutes of COMMERCIALS that movie theaters subject you to these days? Now, some are kind enough to put most of them before the start time (good) but there are always a few (3+ and growing - i've seen 5) "sponsor" commercials (bad!) that are at the "start" of the movie. Throw in the idiotic theatres that start the commercials at the start time of the movie and...well guess who just gets it on netflix a month later? I have a 100" projector screen and 7.1 surround at home and MY popcorn costs me pennies, not $7.
Corporate greed is 1) driving away consumers 2) causing people to "steal" or "cheat" to get what they would pay a fair and reasonable price for convinient use of 3) PISSING ME OFF 4) trying to compensate for #1, #2 but doing more things to cause them and 5) inundating peopel with so much advertizing that we're becoming immune so they increase it more.
I don't know about anyone else, but i refuse to ever click on a banner add, pop-up, pop-under, hover-popup, etc. and buy something. If I want something i'll go google some adds and let them get the money for it. When browsing a site I basically don't even "See" the adds as i've trained my brain to ignore the whack-a-mole, animaged GIF, or flash-based adds totally. Same with TV commercials too...I'm the 0% statistic.
I've used baen (webscriptions.net to be more specific) for several years now.
They're great. No stupid DRM, no annoying BS, multiple formats. Oh, and if you buy a hardcover and get one of those CDs (the Honor Harrington one is what got me started on the ebook) you'll note that they are FREE TO DISTRIBUTE.
You can't resell them, but just like a library - those ebooks are free for anyone to read. I bet i could find every baen ebook on P2P for free but i don't bother. They books are cheaper (~$3-5 but slowing getting near "real" prices these days) and I can do what i want with them. I've "given away" several copies and gotten a couple people on there buying books.
The best part, once you buy a book - you can re-download it in any format. Any time. As many times as you want.
If only someone did similar with MP3s - and dont' point to the $1.30 DRM-free tracks. Make it $.25 - $.50 and I'll be interested. I might buy one book a week for $5 but can easily download 10-20 songs in a day if I'm looking for new music.
If they know it's FU and sue, you get damages for them filing a punative lawsuit. Or something vaugely like that since IANAL and am fed up with this IP/Copyright/patent/etc. BS.
And while it *may* be an affirmative defense, you need a lawyer on vaugely equal footing with the MAFFIA's team of hounds. So even if you win, you lose. As usual.
Oh, I don't know. Someone with lesser means than the person in the article could easily be ruined by a simple arrest like this. Yes, poor people are guaranteed legal representation. If you beleve public defenders are in the same class as $200-400/hr lawyers then see warcraft macro below.
Given a vindictive cop (obvious here), a crummy lawyer (public defender, status quo), and a judge not in the mood (they're people too)...this could easily result in a conviction, probation a/o even some jail time. That could ruin someone's life. Tell me how this does not have the potential to be very destructive.
Just because *YOU* can pay a lawyer does not mean everyone else can.
"Oops, didn't see you there. Didn't intend to bump into you."
vs.
"I willfully do [this act] to you knowing the situation and the general effect it will have"
Intention is the key here, as it often is with the law. The manager INTENTIONALLY chased after the guy and INTENTIONALLY prevented him from leaving.
As a public officer the rules change a bit - a cop is required to know, obey, and uphold the law. He clearly did not do that. For a cop, ignorance of law is not an excuse. If you wanted to twist it, he was negligent is his duty as he didn't know the law. His gross negligence resulted in an arguable innocent man being harassed and arrested. Hence...lawsuit.
Since when is "sticking it to the man" defined as following the letter of the law? The law (which "the man" wrote and "the man" upholds, in theory) categorically states that he does not have to show ID.
Keep in mind the guy who got arrested tried to LEAVE. He got in the car and was STOPPED by the manager. The manager could have easily stopped wasting EVERYONE's time by simply not trying to conduct an unlawful search. If you were being held captive (car blocked in by 2 people...and it's very illegal and unsafe to try to 'nudge' them out of the way) what would you do?
Two idiots detain you and try to force you to do something illegal and you think you should go along with it just to "save everyone's time"???
If you want to talk about wasting time though...how about having noisy parties that get the cops called weekly? Shouldn't you follow the demands of the neighbor (akin to the store manager!) and not have your parties?
He regrets that his siblings were upset but the events that took place. Unfortunately, it was NOT HIS FAULT. He followed that law, his rights were violated. It's the cop's fault, and the manager's fault and the 'loss prevention' guy's fault.
I'm quite sure he did not "enjoy" being arrested. He's not on a "power trip" - he is asserting his legally granted RIGHTS. His right to unreasonable search and seisure, his right to privacy, his right - as spelled out in OHIO law - not to provide a drivers license if he's not driving. Would you suggest he agree to a strip search if they demanded one. How about one done right there on the sidewalk?
To all the SHEEPLE:
Claiming one right is less important than any other diminishes the value of ALL our rights. Claiming a right is not imporant because it's not convinient severely diminishes that right and others. ALL OUR RIGHTS ARE GRANTED TO US. WE SHOULD HAVE EVERY EXPECTATION THAT *ALL* OF THEM ARE MAINTAINED.
To all the people who claim that this guy caused the situation or that he should have given in to difuse the situation:
If the LAW says you can do X... If the LAW says your rights are Y... If the LAW says you're protected from Z...
WHY IN THE WORLD ARE YOU EXPECTING HIM TO DO SOMETHING ELSE? Seriously people. The manager of the store and the cop were dead wrong and you want HIM to give in? Yes, it would have been easier - for him - but instead of giving him kudos for pushing back against people encroaching on his rights (and those of others in similar situations i'm sure) you complain about him?
Ok. So Yahoo follows Chinese law and provides information to the chinese gov't... and gets sued in US courts. Then people cry FAIR...saying Yahoo should know to obey 'international human rights' nonsense.
Yet VZ follows the mandate of it's OWN gov't who i guarantee have the most weight in determining 'international human rights' and winds up in court. Then the DOJ is looking to have the lawsuit dropped?!
So wait.
China forces a company to provide private info to 'out' a journalist per a LAWFUL (in china) request = BAD
Verizon willingly cooperates with secret requests (of highly questionable legality) to not only provide information on-hand but actively seek out and CAPTURE information (i.e. wiretap) for the *US* gov't = GOOD??
I know we're 'holier than thou' but seriously...can anyone in their right mind justify the disparity? I mean, without resorting to 'because we said so' like my parents used to when I was 6.
This assumes there is something "Wrong" with viewing porn. You can wax poetic about how it degrades women (though, wouldn't it also degrade men? double standard, meh) but that alleged degredation happened when the film or pictures were TAKEN. Nothing happens if 50 people view it or 500 or 5000. If 50,000,000 people view it that person is a porn star and, while the focus of many fantasies, that person is given as much attention as your celebrities and athletes.
It's nothing more than a case of a group of people trying to impose their arbitrary morals on another group of people. "FOR THE CHILDREN" they cry. How about educating the parents and providing them with the tools, knowledge and time to educate their children. Educate them that porn, like cartoons, is scrpited, acted out, and has little to do with real life.
Educate those children so they are prepared to make their own decisions. They will also make their own mistakes and learn from them with your support.
Besides, does a person magically become able to safely view porn when the clock ticks over to 18 years? What exactly changes? What's done to prepare them? Zip.
That's great but my Pentium 1 - 133Mhz CPU could play MP3s. The tiny 'couple mW' CPU in the ipod shuffle can play MP3s. You expect me to believe that a modern computer is having CPU contention issues over the processing power to play a MP3? Even with the bloatware that is know as Vista...playing a MP3 can't need more power than opening Excel or Word.
Slashdot Mirror
Great. We now have police telling people they're asking too many questions and arresting people for it.
4 of them couldn't remove him without a tazer? And then they had to arrest him? God...take him outside, dump him on the ground and close the doors. But let's be realistic - anyone who disagrees with the police state must be arrested.
Christ, they should try this in congress.
You talk past an allotted time, you get tazered. That would sure clean the idiots who babble on about nonsense. "FOR TEH CHILDREN....!!!!!11!!111oneoneone"
"I'm sorry senator, we're tired of hearing you. Please step down"
"Sorry, but i'm not releasing the floor until you address my issue with shoe laces poisioning parakeets in indonesia"
"Ok, we warned you. Go get em boys"
"Ahh what..ZZZZzzzzzZZZZZZzzzzz..noooo...ZZZZZzzzzzZZZZZzzzz...please...ZZZZZZzzzzZZZZZzzzz..."
"And on to the next topic. Discuss raises for the senate."
Disturbing the peace...is such an insane 'crime'. It's a bullshit charge that allows police to tack on the 'resisting arrest' that they love to throw around.
... whatever. Now granted,i'm sure there are some general definitions but if asking more questions that someone deemed appropriate at a Q&A forum is disturbing the peace...we're in trouble. Besides that, everyone WAS peaceful until the officers physically restrained HIM. Heck, the officers were even told that the question WOULD be answered.
... it should be allowed and accomodated. The president does work for the PEOPLE, right? Right? Erm, hello? Anyone...? Darn, i knew i shouldn't have let them put my soapbox in the basement of a barn in michigan for the FL rally. At least i got my free speech...
Disturbing the peace could be farting in a library. It could be mowing your lawn at 8AM or when your neighbor happens to be having a 12 hour 'gathering' for
The insanity that surrounds anything tied to a president or president-hopeful blows my mind. Freedom is speech is good...just not when it's around my presidental campaign, speech, etc.? If the people feel the need to rally, rant, chant, boo, hold signs, or whatever
Ah so?
That advice is useless for anything other than new construction. Not only that, but it's incredibly difficult to design a NORMAL house with NORMAL building materials to be termite-proof. You realize they can get through something basically the size of a pinhole? They can and will eat sheetrock. They fit through small cracks in a cement foundation. They will build tunnels up the walls of a raised foundation to reach wood. You need a perfectly sealed house with no exterior wood. I suppose i could build a medevil castle. Oh, and they fly.
Yeah, but show me a single chemical that's as effective and long lasting at killing the friggin termites that have been munching on my house in years past!
I wish i could still get my hands on some DDT - one treatment would keep my house safe for 10-20 years easily. Much better than the 2-5 year chemicals they use now with those retarded 'bait' traps.
WTB DDT
Public information means what it says ... information that is freely available to the public. Period. If you think there is security in making it more difficult to obtain you're delusional.
It's like saying "free speech!!!" and then turning around and expecting someone to excercise that right only in their basement. At a whisper. When alone.
If it's public information it should be readily available. Furthermore, if it's PUBLIC INFORMATION how can you reasonable claim copyright?! That's pure insanity. Who holds the copyright? The public? Go futher, it's information - *not* an artistic work of any sort. What will they try now, patent it?
How about skipping the phone-home-to-install and going with 'authentication for updates' scheme?
Require a CD Key like most do for installs. Anything more than that becomes a headache for both the owner and the seller. it highly depends on your target audience and you have to consider that SOME piracy is a good thing. Call it advertizing and you break even. If your product is so good that 500,000 people will steal it then want updates and bug fixes...then you can add a big chunk of those as new sales.
Giving things away is not always the same as giving away profits.
See, you assume your version of the hypothetical future is the only outcome. Society has proven that if there's a way to make money, someone will. If you can't see any POSSIBLE way for someone to make money...someone you can't see WILL make money.
... do honestly thing that *copyright law* will prevent illegal duplication of the game? Erm...i don't think so. I think MS's DRM and ability to prevent updates, online play, etc. via their XBLive service will keep FAR FAR more people away from copied games than copyright law.
/. post.
How about this scenario. Abolish "copyright law" as it stands. Allow companies to develow a REAL, EFFECTIVE DRM system. To take your laughable Halo 3
Abolishing copyright laws would kill off many companies. Many others would take their place. How about a company (companies?) to provide real-time DRM, authentication, etc.? This way, if it's yours you're guaranteed to have access to install and use it where ever you go. Internet connectivity is not universally available yet but... i'm also not going to solve copyright/DRM for the world in a
Basically copyright has managed to re-direct the task of protecting a companies work from the company itself to the court system. "Well your honor, yes we made a full version available to download but it specifically stated that you had to pay $50 up-front or $50,000 after 60 days. As such, we're requesting $50,000 in damanged plus legal fees plus $billions in penalty.
Or how about "our laughable drm depended on microsoft's autorun feature in windows so we're going to sue someone for posting in a forum that holding the shift key 'breaks' our DRM. It's breaking encryption/DRM and thus illegal to publish via the DMCA."
The thought that an idea or information can be illegal is...just beyond stupid if you ask me.
Copyright is useful to some...in some ways...sometimes. It also has many bad aspects and could be replaced.
Make information illegal and only criminals will have that information.
Is it me or does this sound like the first chapter in several books they made us read in high school (appologies to those too young for HS) where books are banned, information is all protected, "citizens" are not permitted anything that might be dangerous, offensive...and i think one of them had people eating generic paste goo or somethign for food.
WAKE UP. If some idiot kid wants to make a chlorine bomb and kills himself because mommy and daddy figured the internet was a good babysitter like the TV is (was?) and paid no attention...blame THEM! Same parents that would take him to buy chlorine tabs at the pool store without asking why...and then blame the 'net.
UGH...why not just justify it all "FOR THE CHILDREN...."
wtb freedom of speech. Who are you to determine what speech is good vs. bad? Let people say what they want! You have the same power/freedom yourself.
If someone tells me that i suck and provides no reason, i find that easier to defend against than someone pointing out actual flaws anyhow! I could simply state that i don't suck and the OP is a doody-head. BFD. Everyone needs to grow up.
Granted this is in australia...and granted they're sueing the FORUM - not the poster. I doubt a court would allow the suit in the US...providers have been given protection against content posted or sent by individuals (i.e. you can't sue an ISP because someone send a child pron through their system).
While i agree with you in general...your google search fails to live up to what you had hoped:
:) /troll
Google search for Dumb Stuff provies -- Results 1 - 10 of about 4,460,000 for dumb stuff. (0.11 seconds)
Apparantly Dumb Stuff is 3x more than Boycotting sony
Ha. How about the 15 minutes of COMMERCIALS that movie theaters subject you to these days? Now, some are kind enough to put most of them before the start time (good) but there are always a few (3+ and growing - i've seen 5) "sponsor" commercials (bad!) that are at the "start" of the movie. Throw in the idiotic theatres that start the commercials at the start time of the movie and...well guess who just gets it on netflix a month later? I have a 100" projector screen and 7.1 surround at home and MY popcorn costs me pennies, not $7.
Corporate greed is 1) driving away consumers 2) causing people to "steal" or "cheat" to get what they would pay a fair and reasonable price for convinient use of 3) PISSING ME OFF 4) trying to compensate for #1, #2 but doing more things to cause them and 5) inundating peopel with so much advertizing that we're becoming immune so they increase it more.
I don't know about anyone else, but i refuse to ever click on a banner add, pop-up, pop-under, hover-popup, etc. and buy something. If I want something i'll go google some adds and let them get the money for it. When browsing a site I basically don't even "See" the adds as i've trained my brain to ignore the whack-a-mole, animaged GIF, or flash-based adds totally. Same with TV commercials too...I'm the 0% statistic.
I've used baen (webscriptions.net to be more specific) for several years now.
They're great. No stupid DRM, no annoying BS, multiple formats. Oh, and if you buy a hardcover and get one of those CDs (the Honor Harrington one is what got me started on the ebook) you'll note that they are FREE TO DISTRIBUTE.
You can't resell them, but just like a library - those ebooks are free for anyone to read. I bet i could find every baen ebook on P2P for free but i don't bother. They books are cheaper (~$3-5 but slowing getting near "real" prices these days) and I can do what i want with them. I've "given away" several copies and gotten a couple people on there buying books.
The best part, once you buy a book - you can re-download it in any format. Any time. As many times as you want.
If only someone did similar with MP3s - and dont' point to the $1.30 DRM-free tracks. Make it $.25 - $.50 and I'll be interested. I might buy one book a week for $5 but can easily download 10-20 songs in a day if I'm looking for new music.
WTB federal anti-SLAPP legislation.
If they know it's FU and sue, you get damages for them filing a punative lawsuit. Or something vaugely like that since IANAL and am fed up with this IP/Copyright/patent/etc. BS.
And while it *may* be an affirmative defense, you need a lawyer on vaugely equal footing with the MAFFIA's team of hounds. So even if you win, you lose. As usual.
Oh, I don't know. Someone with lesser means than the person in the article could easily be ruined by a simple arrest like this. Yes, poor people are guaranteed legal representation. If you beleve public defenders are in the same class as $200-400/hr lawyers then see warcraft macro below.
/Target horse /attack horse /attack horse /attack horse /attack horse
Given a vindictive cop (obvious here), a crummy lawyer (public defender, status quo), and a judge not in the mood (they're people too)...this could easily result in a conviction, probation a/o even some jail time. That could ruin someone's life. Tell me how this does not have the potential to be very destructive.
Just because *YOU* can pay a lawyer does not mean everyone else can.
Wacraft macro:
*horse dies*
Or to be even more specific:
"Oops, didn't see you there. Didn't intend to bump into you."
vs.
"I willfully do [this act] to you knowing the situation and the general effect it will have"
Intention is the key here, as it often is with the law. The manager INTENTIONALLY chased after the guy and INTENTIONALLY prevented him from leaving.
As a public officer the rules change a bit - a cop is required to know, obey, and uphold the law. He clearly did not do that. For a cop, ignorance of law is not an excuse. If you wanted to twist it, he was negligent is his duty as he didn't know the law. His gross negligence resulted in an arguable innocent man being harassed and arrested. Hence...lawsuit.
Since when is "sticking it to the man" defined as following the letter of the law? The law (which "the man" wrote and "the man" upholds, in theory) categorically states that he does not have to show ID.
Keep in mind the guy who got arrested tried to LEAVE. He got in the car and was STOPPED by the manager. The manager could have easily stopped wasting EVERYONE's time by simply not trying to conduct an unlawful search. If you were being held captive (car blocked in by 2 people...and it's very illegal and unsafe to try to 'nudge' them out of the way) what would you do?
Two idiots detain you and try to force you to do something illegal and you think you should go along with it just to "save everyone's time"???
If you want to talk about wasting time though...how about having noisy parties that get the cops called weekly? Shouldn't you follow the demands of the neighbor (akin to the store manager!) and not have your parties?
He regrets that his siblings were upset but the events that took place. Unfortunately, it was NOT HIS FAULT. He followed that law, his rights were violated. It's the cop's fault, and the manager's fault and the 'loss prevention' guy's fault.
I'm quite sure he did not "enjoy" being arrested. He's not on a "power trip" - he is asserting his legally granted RIGHTS. His right to unreasonable search and seisure, his right to privacy, his right - as spelled out in OHIO law - not to provide a drivers license if he's not driving. Would you suggest he agree to a strip search if they demanded one. How about one done right there on the sidewalk?
To all the SHEEPLE:
Claiming one right is less important than any other diminishes the value of ALL our rights. Claiming a right is not imporant because it's not convinient severely diminishes that right and others. ALL OUR RIGHTS ARE GRANTED TO US. WE SHOULD HAVE EVERY EXPECTATION THAT *ALL* OF THEM ARE MAINTAINED.
Exactly.
To all the people who claim that this guy caused the situation or that he should have given in to difuse the situation:
If the LAW says you can do X... If the LAW says your rights are Y... If the LAW says you're protected from Z...
WHY IN THE WORLD ARE YOU EXPECTING HIM TO DO SOMETHING ELSE? Seriously people. The manager of the store and the cop were dead wrong and you want HIM to give in? Yes, it would have been easier - for him - but instead of giving him kudos for pushing back against people encroaching on his rights (and those of others in similar situations i'm sure) you complain about him?
What planet do you live on?
Ok. So Yahoo follows Chinese law and provides information to the chinese gov't ... and gets sued in US courts. Then people cry FAIR...saying Yahoo should know to obey 'international human rights' nonsense.
Yet VZ follows the mandate of it's OWN gov't who i guarantee have the most weight in determining 'international human rights' and winds up in court. Then the DOJ is looking to have the lawsuit dropped?!
So wait.
China forces a company to provide private info to 'out' a journalist per a LAWFUL (in china) request = BAD
Verizon willingly cooperates with secret requests (of highly questionable legality) to not only provide information on-hand but actively seek out and CAPTURE information (i.e. wiretap) for the *US* gov't = GOOD??
I know we're 'holier than thou' but seriously...can anyone in their right mind justify the disparity? I mean, without resorting to 'because we said so' like my parents used to when I was 6.
This assumes there is something "Wrong" with viewing porn. You can wax poetic about how it degrades women (though, wouldn't it also degrade men? double standard, meh) but that alleged degredation happened when the film or pictures were TAKEN. Nothing happens if 50 people view it or 500 or 5000. If 50,000,000 people view it that person is a porn star and, while the focus of many fantasies, that person is given as much attention as your celebrities and athletes.
It's nothing more than a case of a group of people trying to impose their arbitrary morals on another group of people. "FOR THE CHILDREN" they cry. How about educating the parents and providing them with the tools, knowledge and time to educate their children. Educate them that porn, like cartoons, is scrpited, acted out, and has little to do with real life.
Educate those children so they are prepared to make their own decisions. They will also make their own mistakes and learn from them with your support.
Besides, does a person magically become able to safely view porn when the clock ticks over to 18 years? What exactly changes? What's done to prepare them? Zip.
There's always push-back on new OS versions. Yes. However what other OS has dell re-introduced because of customer demand?
What other OS was burdened with oppressive DRM?
What other OS had sooo many bells and whistles that did nothing useful?
I've lead corporate upgrades through several rounds from 95 -> NT -> 2k -> XP
I've weighed the pros and cons and held off within reason each time. This time? I'm still planning it but it's far lower on my priority list.
I don't see any reason why someone would use this as an OS over XP...ever.
I've scheduled to have a beta vista image created by the end of the year at my company. We have no intention of deploying it until *maybe* 2H08.
That's great but my Pentium 1 - 133Mhz CPU could play MP3s. The tiny 'couple mW' CPU in the ipod shuffle can play MP3s. You expect me to believe that a modern computer is having CPU contention issues over the processing power to play a MP3? Even with the bloatware that is know as Vista...playing a MP3 can't need more power than opening Excel or Word.