Society has created shame in you of many things you should not be ashamed of. You should stop assuming that just because something isn't *normal* it is bad.
I'll believe it when I see full retraction of internet bans. They're just trying to look good for the press, just like in all the other stories about china lately.
Well if the smokers in question have children, and the privacy of their home includes in the same air as the said children - then somebody bloody well better be thinking of the children because the parents sure as hell aren't. I can't wait until smoking near your own child is considered child abuse - it's more likely to do serious harm than a slap on the arse. (Not that I'm condoning that)
What people do that doesn't affect others is all well and good - so when the smokers start wearing fishbowls over their head to keep the foulness in - then I'll be all for their rights. Plus - it'd look hell-a silly.
UK will give him a fair trial because we don't think every second person (and EVERY foreign citizen, even nominal allies) is a ter'rist.
Let's give him a trial in a country where the legal system isn't an international joke, eh?
Punishment equal to the crime, and here the crime was minor, the punishment shouldn't involve being forced to leave your country, much less tried under foreign laws, and jailed in a foreign country as a pariah.
Modern games have rather a lot of rules, enough that it's inefficient to have the server run all of them. It's not a knowledge gap - everyone knows it already - it's a compromise for performance in a field (unlike online shopping) where performance > security.
The fact that they have a clearly tiered service is a big step towards the tiered internet that we all know and fear as one of the few things that will break the internet - perhaps if you don't have the choice, that's all well and good for you.
But just because Searcy isn't screwing you as hard as comcast is - that doesn't mean they aren't screwing you hard anyway.
For comparison - I found an ISP that offered unlimited 8mb, with a promise of no FUP traffic shaping because of high use, and a 1 month contract which makes this quite easy to believe. My small group of people regularly exceed 100GB per month (probably a lot more than that) and the ISP doesn't block bittorrent, or any other service we're aware of.
Not (only) being smug about my internet service, but as it's £93/month - sometimes you have to vote with your wallet.
Also rumour has it they're starting trial installations of Fiber in the UK next year ^_^ 100mb/s broadband, yay.
First they would like to sell you a picture of the cake, which you can then use once (under licence) in order to decide if you wish to continue purchasing the rest of the cake.
Then they sell you the cake, but you are actually (again) buying a licence - the licence permits you to eat the cake, but you may not give a piece to friends, nor may you sell the cake on to another - no cake shops.
Finally upon attempting to eat the cake, you find, carefully concealed within the packaging, a note which reads - cake is only compatable with the iSpoon - purchased seperately.
You don't seem to realise that the data requested includes every consumer, as well as provider, of data.
It's not having a voice that's being traced - it's having the audacity to hear that voice.
Free speech can only come after Free Listening.
I think in this case, contempt of court is quite a reasonable response - as a UK citizen whose records may be viewed by a US company to whom I have not given any right to my data (under the DPA) - I am disgusted, angered and thoroughly in contempt of this court.
It's not preemptive if it follows a judgement on the same company about the same product, regarding the same offence.
Plus MS has made the 'it's too late to change it now' defence before, regarding IE's integration as Explorer.
However it's not so much the product as the companies marketing and sales actions that make them anti-competitive, so this is somewhat futile anyway.
38 years?
That's insane...what there says this guy should get jail time at all?
Pretty much burglary is the only real crime in there, otherwise - what's different from a guy who leaned over the table to write different letters on the teacher's grading paper.
If the guy had edited the records on paper, he'd probably be getting a rap on the knuckles from the school - not a threat of jail time and a felony on his record.
It's a clear case of (Crime a) 'On the Internets!'
Solution: Give them 'holy' golden parachutes, and let the idiots pancake. This is just an increasingly obvious example of the way in which capitalism tends towards a class system where those who need, don't get, and those who don't need, get as much as they could ask for.
"Are you sure you want to start a Revolution? This will cause Anarchy for 20 turns." [Yes] No
I want my own Chii~
I suspect that the Japanese are just hiding this technology from us westerners, and think we should petition the UN to make them share.
Chii~
Are you honestly suggesting that Google start using the tactics most commonly attributed to MS?
If google tries to do it differently (and it sounds like it will be somewhat) then it might cause new ideas and evolution of the concept, just buying out the competition only ensures that profits go to google, nothing new will come of it.
I support google's creative attempt.
The foreign anime market is not 'shrinking' due to fansubbing.
One of the heads of ADV said at Amecon '05 that free fansubs are good for the industry, so long as the fans are willing to buy later.
The free fansubs allow people to find anime series, and thusly increase the number of people who have seen anime, then they become paying customers.
What's more, the companies involved watch the market to see what's being shared - then they licence the content that the fans want.
The only 'downside' is that japanese companies also watch the sharers, and if they find out a series is surprisingly popular (Naruto for example) they then actually charge based on how much the fans want it, and this can on occassion cause the foreign companies to be unable to purchase a licence.
But that's only because they're asking for what it's worth, supply and demand, and thusly it's fair.
Slashdot Mirror
Americans, on the other hand have been considering bringing back 'cutting off the hands of the offender' for stealing loaves of bread.
Umm, Robin Hood was a wanted criminal, according to most of the commonly believed lore.
I don't think his excuse *worked*
Society has created shame in you of many things you should not be ashamed of.
You should stop assuming that just because something isn't *normal* it is bad.
You'd think someone on /. would know that much.
I'll believe it when I see full retraction of internet bans.
They're just trying to look good for the press, just like in all the other stories about china lately.
So declares the Ministry of Peace.
You must be a law student.
Well if the smokers in question have children, and the privacy of their home includes in the same air as the said children - then somebody bloody well better be thinking of the children because the parents sure as hell aren't.
I can't wait until smoking near your own child is considered child abuse - it's more likely to do serious harm than a slap on the arse. (Not that I'm condoning that)
What people do that doesn't affect others is all well and good - so when the smokers start wearing fishbowls over their head to keep the foulness in - then I'll be all for their rights.
Plus - it'd look hell-a silly.
UK will give him a fair trial because we don't think every second person (and EVERY foreign citizen, even nominal allies) is a ter'rist.
Let's give him a trial in a country where the legal system isn't an international joke, eh?
Punishment equal to the crime, and here the crime was minor, the punishment shouldn't involve being forced to leave your country, much less tried under foreign laws, and jailed in a foreign country as a pariah.
Modern games have rather a lot of rules, enough that it's inefficient to have the server run all of them.
It's not a knowledge gap - everyone knows it already - it's a compromise for performance in a field (unlike online shopping) where performance > security.
The fact that they have a clearly tiered service is a big step towards the tiered internet that we all know and fear as one of the few things that will break the internet - perhaps if you don't have the choice, that's all well and good for you.
But just because Searcy isn't screwing you as hard as comcast is - that doesn't mean they aren't screwing you hard anyway.
For comparison - I found an ISP that offered unlimited 8mb, with a promise of no FUP traffic shaping because of high use, and a 1 month contract which makes this quite easy to believe.
My small group of people regularly exceed 100GB per month (probably a lot more than that) and the ISP doesn't block bittorrent, or any other service we're aware of.
Not (only) being smug about my internet service, but as it's £93/month - sometimes you have to vote with your wallet.
Also rumour has it they're starting trial installations of Fiber in the UK next year ^_^ 100mb/s broadband, yay.
Sounds a lot like they're telling you (successfully) which software to run on your PC. Maybe you should be looking for a new ISP too.
Then they sell you the cake, but you are actually (again) buying a licence - the licence permits you to eat the cake, but you may not give a piece to friends, nor may you sell the cake on to another - no cake shops.
Finally upon attempting to eat the cake, you find, carefully concealed within the packaging, a note which reads - cake is only compatable with the iSpoon - purchased seperately.
Or Whack-A-R(AT/IAA)
You don't seem to realise that the data requested includes every consumer, as well as provider, of data. It's not having a voice that's being traced - it's having the audacity to hear that voice. Free speech can only come after Free Listening.
I think in this case, contempt of court is quite a reasonable response - as a UK citizen whose records may be viewed by a US company to whom I have not given any right to my data (under the DPA) - I am disgusted, angered and thoroughly in contempt of this court.
Your response of course was, "How about *this* time?"
It's not preemptive if it follows a judgement on the same company about the same product, regarding the same offence. Plus MS has made the 'it's too late to change it now' defence before, regarding IE's integration as Explorer. However it's not so much the product as the companies marketing and sales actions that make them anti-competitive, so this is somewhat futile anyway.
38 years? That's insane...what there says this guy should get jail time at all? Pretty much burglary is the only real crime in there, otherwise - what's different from a guy who leaned over the table to write different letters on the teacher's grading paper. If the guy had edited the records on paper, he'd probably be getting a rap on the knuckles from the school - not a threat of jail time and a felony on his record. It's a clear case of (Crime a) 'On the Internets!'
Solution: Give them 'holy' golden parachutes, and let the idiots pancake.
This is just an increasingly obvious example of the way in which capitalism tends towards a class system where those who need, don't get, and those who don't need, get as much as they could ask for.
"Are you sure you want to start a Revolution? This will cause Anarchy for 20 turns."
[Yes] No
I want my own Chii~ I suspect that the Japanese are just hiding this technology from us westerners, and think we should petition the UN to make them share. Chii~
Are you honestly suggesting that Google start using the tactics most commonly attributed to MS? If google tries to do it differently (and it sounds like it will be somewhat) then it might cause new ideas and evolution of the concept, just buying out the competition only ensures that profits go to google, nothing new will come of it. I support google's creative attempt.
Ah, I wish I could give you +1 'Right' and -1 'Shameless Flamebait' at the same time. Nice rant though.
The foreign anime market is not 'shrinking' due to fansubbing. One of the heads of ADV said at Amecon '05 that free fansubs are good for the industry, so long as the fans are willing to buy later. The free fansubs allow people to find anime series, and thusly increase the number of people who have seen anime, then they become paying customers. What's more, the companies involved watch the market to see what's being shared - then they licence the content that the fans want. The only 'downside' is that japanese companies also watch the sharers, and if they find out a series is surprisingly popular (Naruto for example) they then actually charge based on how much the fans want it, and this can on occassion cause the foreign companies to be unable to purchase a licence. But that's only because they're asking for what it's worth, supply and demand, and thusly it's fair.