Without judges, the law would never get enforced, except possibly in a police state.
Judges are free to make law simply because they're the only ones who can rule on it. If someone robs you, cheats you, or does a shitty job on a contract, naturally they aren't gonna wanna fix it. Most of the time, if you get screwed, you have to SUE to get it fixed.
Which means that you need a *judge* to make a *ruling* on your case. And only a judge can make a binding decision. Some person is still arbitrarily deciding what goes no matter who resolves the dispute. With a judge, it's, well, a judge (or jury).
It's just like a GM in a tabletop RPG. The GM is the one who knows all the rules, and EVEN IF THEY DIDN'T WRITE THEM, their decisions are final simply because they're the ones interpreting things. It's why a referee can make binding calls during a game even though they didn't write the rule books. It's why they are called "refer-ee"'s, because we REFER to them.
I could pore over rulebooks day in and day out if I wanted to, but the bottom line is that my decision stands as final because I have been entrusted with making rulings. Even if I make a mistake and rule "wrongly", my decision stands.
And, naturally, I don't pore over rulebooks 24/7 because I HAVE A GAME TO RUN. If I constantly went over the rulebooks just to make sure that I didn't screw up, my players would get sick of the delays and go find someone else.
Similiarly, real judges have to move quickly. They have a crapload of cases to go through and they don't exactly have time to go over everything with a fine toothed comb to make sure that they always get it right. Not to mention there's a million things that can go wrong and skew an equitable result, such as bribery, witholding, evidence that either fails to be admissible, or is never discovered, or just plain doesn't work.
Judges make law because that's an unavoidable side effect of making a ruling. That's why we call them "judges".
Combine this with the fact that Vista has received NUMEROUS complaints and is still being forced onto PC's by forcing XP off of preinstalls from OEM's, and you have a situation that "Ordinary User Linux" can help immensely.
The more competition Vista gets the better. I wouldn't mind using vista myself so much if it didn't outright SUCK.
Linux is a good OS and restricting it to power users and server gurus is just plain snobbish. Desktop PC is a viable market that is being force fed slop that makes Big Brother's version taste like cherry pie. Having a desktop version of linux would resolve that.
But they could alleviate a CRAPLOAD of the alleged "stress" caused by BT.
They should write a "BT proxy" that intelligently caches torrents and saves them craploads of border router bandwidth.
Just like an HTTP proxy, it would localize information and make it go faster.
CC might not save any internal bandwidth, but since they won't be able to stop BT, they could at least step aside and reduce strain on its edge routers.
I duly disclosed that my statement was based on circumstantial evidence. Anyone who fails to note my qualifying statement is putting words in my mouth.
Which is exactly why companies WONT do it without subsidies.
If I'm a greedy "fucking cocksucker" I unfortunately am not going to give a damn about anyone's profit but my own.
and why shouldn't I? If I go altruistic, I'm going to get fucked royally by my competitors, who would take advantage of my niceness so quickly my head would spin.
anyone who has seen the TV show "friend or foe" will know quite well what I'm talking about.
Self interest is what is wrecking things.
One company that is out for blood forces everyone else to follow suit.
Because cooperation is, by nature, a cooperative effort, and all it takes is one greedy bastard to ruin things for everyone.
I won't feel comfortable being nice unless I could trust everyone else to do so.
But, if everyone was nice...the opportunity to screw them all would be sooo tempting......which is exactly why my competitors wouldn't play nice.
The fact that Eve is going this ballistic suggests that something strange is going on. Not proof cold, but certainly it qualifies as somewhat sound circumstantial evidence.
If I were the boss of a company with an IT department, I would trust my geeks.
Unless and until someone passes muster with IT, and/or proves that they are worthy of the title of "geek", they are absolutely not allowed to install anything themselves.
Screwing with computers is an automatic termination if you do not have an IT certificate!
My concern isn't too much productivity and "lording it over" my users, but rather, security.
There's simply too much malware out there that can, pardon the pun, worm its way into a user's machine for me to trust a mere novice to be mucking about. Heck, I'm a nerd myself and even I got hit with a boot sector virus. Granted it was an old machine donated to me, but I still got burned.
Now, here's the catch.
Anyone who passes an IT competency exam will be granted the privilege of administrating their own machine.
Users of both types are subject to having their computers periodically checked and searched for malware, porn, and other stuff.
Slackers need to get off my payroll, as do boobs who get my machines compromised and in turn risk what is almost CERTAINLY confidential info. Heck, if one of those machines turns rogue, I could be facing a HUGE lawsuit. Which is precisely why I only want qualified geeks screwing with the machines to begin with.
If someone is geeky enough to be trusted with the machine, AND he manages to get his work done, I really don't care if he plays solitaire or WoW. All I ask is that he do the job I hired him for without chewing up resources. If he can have fun in the process, more power to him.
Er, it seems like you failed to notice the sarcasm I was using...
Honestly, when it comes to automated technology being used to serve as judge, jury, and executioner in a criminal case, I wouldn't trust it farther than I could throw it.
Slashdot Mirror
With ubuntu the GPL expressly gives you the right to make copies.
Please do not make such bad analogies.
You really should get that looked at by a doctor...
Without judges, the law would never get enforced, except possibly in a police state.
Judges are free to make law simply because they're the only ones who can rule on it. If someone robs you, cheats you, or does a shitty job on a contract, naturally they aren't gonna wanna fix it. Most of the time, if you get screwed, you have to SUE to get it fixed.
Which means that you need a *judge* to make a *ruling* on your case. And only a judge can make a binding decision. Some person is still arbitrarily deciding what goes no matter who resolves the dispute. With a judge, it's, well, a judge (or jury).
It's just like a GM in a tabletop RPG. The GM is the one who knows all the rules, and EVEN IF THEY DIDN'T WRITE THEM, their decisions are final simply because they're the ones interpreting things. It's why a referee can make binding calls during a game even though they didn't write the rule books. It's why they are called "refer-ee"'s, because we REFER to them.
I could pore over rulebooks day in and day out if I wanted to, but the bottom line is that my decision stands as final because I have been entrusted with making rulings. Even if I make a mistake and rule "wrongly", my decision stands.
And, naturally, I don't pore over rulebooks 24/7 because I HAVE A GAME TO RUN. If I constantly went over the rulebooks just to make sure that I didn't screw up, my players would get sick of the delays and go find someone else.
Similiarly, real judges have to move quickly. They have a crapload of cases to go through and they don't exactly have time to go over everything with a fine toothed comb to make sure that they always get it right. Not to mention there's a million things that can go wrong and skew an equitable result, such as bribery, witholding, evidence that either fails to be admissible, or is never discovered, or just plain doesn't work.
Judges make law because that's an unavoidable side effect of making a ruling. That's why we call them "judges".
Xen?
Bochs?
Qemu?
Come on, you can't be saying that hooky blabbermouth VMware is the only option...can you?
Probably some member here who didn't want his karma trashed by a negative moderation.
Air travel is a simple man-made participation in what birds were already doing.
Time travel is not already done by ANYTHING natural or pre-existing.
Corrupt as it may sound, I'm glad that the FBI has a taste of fear.
If they're going to be dishing out FUD on 9/11 warrantless wiretaps and NSL's, they deserve to take FUD.
Riiight.
And let me know when you can get past the special interest groups who are happily devouring the souls of the congressman who sold their souls to them.
So is it like they seize it as contraband and it becomes government property?
Not unless you release it to them under the GPL. ...unless of course they choose to cheat and steal it, but that would be illegal.
What about suing the state for negligence in hiring the copyright infringer in the first place?
What about agency law? What about the case of "respondent superior"?
Big Pharma sponsored FDA anyone?
MS Windows is the primary desktop OS.
Combine this with the fact that Vista has received NUMEROUS complaints and is still being forced onto PC's by forcing XP off of preinstalls from OEM's, and you have a situation that "Ordinary User Linux" can help immensely.
The more competition Vista gets the better. I wouldn't mind using vista myself so much if it didn't outright SUCK.
Linux is a good OS and restricting it to power users and server gurus is just plain snobbish. Desktop PC is a viable market that is being force fed slop that makes Big Brother's version taste like cherry pie. Having a desktop version of linux would resolve that.
For some reason I read the +5 Funny as +5 Furry
Not that comca$t would ever go for it...
But they could alleviate a CRAPLOAD of the alleged "stress" caused by BT.
They should write a "BT proxy" that intelligently caches torrents and saves them craploads of border router bandwidth.
Just like an HTTP proxy, it would localize information and make it go faster.
CC might not save any internal bandwidth, but since they won't be able to stop BT, they could at least step aside and reduce strain on its edge routers.
I duly disclosed that my statement was based on circumstantial evidence. Anyone who fails to note my qualifying statement is putting words in my mouth.
Which is exactly why companies WONT do it without subsidies.
...which is exactly why my competitors wouldn't play nice.
If I'm a greedy "fucking cocksucker" I unfortunately am not going to give a damn about anyone's profit but my own.
and why shouldn't I? If I go altruistic, I'm going to get fucked royally by my competitors, who would take advantage of my niceness so quickly my head would spin.
anyone who has seen the TV show "friend or foe" will know quite well what I'm talking about.
Self interest is what is wrecking things.
One company that is out for blood forces everyone else to follow suit.
Because cooperation is, by nature, a cooperative effort, and all it takes is one greedy bastard to ruin things for everyone.
I won't feel comfortable being nice unless I could trust everyone else to do so.
But, if everyone was nice...the opportunity to screw them all would be sooo tempting...
where's your proof that they aren't?
The fact that Eve is going this ballistic suggests that something strange is going on. Not proof cold, but certainly it qualifies as somewhat sound circumstantial evidence.
If I were the boss of a company with an IT department, I would trust my geeks.
Unless and until someone passes muster with IT, and/or proves that they are worthy of the title of "geek", they are absolutely not allowed to install anything themselves.
Screwing with computers is an automatic termination if you do not have an IT certificate!
My concern isn't too much productivity and "lording it over" my users, but rather, security.
There's simply too much malware out there that can, pardon the pun, worm its way into a user's machine for me to trust a mere novice to be mucking about. Heck, I'm a nerd myself and even I got hit with a boot sector virus. Granted it was an old machine donated to me, but I still got burned.
Now, here's the catch.
Anyone who passes an IT competency exam will be granted the privilege of administrating their own machine.
Users of both types are subject to having their computers periodically checked and searched for malware, porn, and other stuff.
Slackers need to get off my payroll, as do boobs who get my machines compromised and in turn risk what is almost CERTAINLY confidential info. Heck, if one of those machines turns rogue, I could be facing a HUGE lawsuit. Which is precisely why I only want qualified geeks screwing with the machines to begin with.
If someone is geeky enough to be trusted with the machine, AND he manages to get his work done, I really don't care if he plays solitaire or WoW. All I ask is that he do the job I hired him for without chewing up resources. If he can have fun in the process, more power to him.
Because the Eve client code is not open source.
Because Eve is a greedy corporation that wants to strangle its users.
Because Eve has shitty security
Because Eve IS TRUSTING THE CLIENT TO DO THINGS THAT NEED TO BE SERVERSIDE TO BE SECURE.
Seriously though, what idiotic company would do ANYTHING clientside?
If Eve gets hacked for this, it would serve them right.
Hosting a booby-trapped torrent themselves is just being mean.
Cardinal rule of any server based game...NEVER TRUST THE CLIENT.
Now, if I'm mistaken, and Eve is merely asserting "proprietary software rights", then I might be able to pass.
You say flamebait, I say funny.
On behalf of /., nothing personal.
:/.
The RIAA is so high up on our hit list that unfortunately some collateral damage is inevitable
A lawyer mans up enough to admit a mistake and you bash him for incompetence?
I rather approve of his integrity here. In fact, this is exactly the sort of thing that the RIAA's lawyers need to start practicing.
I am offended that you would troll and flamebait like this...and I don't even know the guy.
Er, it seems like you failed to notice the sarcasm I was using...
Honestly, when it comes to automated technology being used to serve as judge, jury, and executioner in a criminal case, I wouldn't trust it farther than I could throw it.
*rimshot*
Mod parent up funny, this is traffic.