I just heard an interview with a forensic accountant who served as an expert witness for the plaintiffs. He said he was surprised the prosecution tried to make its case on the most difficult, least provable grounds possible. He also suggested other lines of attack that would have been much more likely to get a conviction.
For anybody interested, the interview was on the CBC Radio show Metro Morning.
This is just a case of following the good old, tried and true tax department/RIAA solution. You go after the small, weak, vulnerable targets. The big ones are likely to defend themselves with armies of lawyers and keep your sorry ass in court for the next hundred years.
Basically, it's much easier and safer to kick a dog with no teeth.
A very large number of Americans, mostly located south of the Mason-Dixon Line and/or in low-population states that are grossly over-represented in government, are too willfully ignorant, too stupid, too inbred and too ill-educated to adapt to a different system of measurement.
They're simply not up to the job, and due to the current political system in the United States, they call the shots on anything involving change.
We already have a vomiting robot. Every time my buddy mixes beer and wine, he turns into the ReTardis. We call him that because, based on production, he has to be larger inside than outside.
My buddy's dad is in his late 80's. Because the computer gave him tools he wanted to use (communication with a family out west, moving a whole lifetime of photographs, slides, 8mm and Super-8 movies going back over a hundred years into digital format, finding in mere seconds information that would have involved a trip to the library when he was a kid), my friend's dad learned how to operate a computer. And because he's the kind of man who does things properly, he took the trouble to learn how to stay safe on-line. His son, ironically, sounds a lot like your uncle. Put together a short PowerPoint presentation illustrating some of the bad stuff, teach him how to behave, and tell him to either get a brain or get off-line.
We live in a digital age. Uncle Dinosaur should learn to swim in it or leave his on-line business to people who are competent.
I've got a Google+ account, and I use it with my more geekish friends. It hasn't caught on in the wider community I deal with, though, in spite of my efforts.
My life would be a lot easier if I could move a total of about 3,000 people over to Google+ and get them to spend the minimal amount of time it takes to get comfortable with it. As far as I'm concerned, the interface beats the crap out of Facebook, and the communications tools are superior.
I actually need Facebook for scheduling events and informing people in several FB groups about them. It's great for that. And a lot of the people in those groups are just happy enough with it that they'd need a really good reason to change. So to an extent, I'm stuck. However, I have certainly felt no obligation to be truthful with Facebook about my age or any other "facts" in my profile. My friends know what's real and what isn't. Nobody else needs to know.
Facebook has been so dickish toward its users that I can't help but think it's just one good alternative away from oblivion. Google Plus wasn't it. Diaspora was stillborn. Alternatives like Orkut and Friendster have never really caught on in North America, but have been moderately successful elsewhere.
So like millions of perpetually-annoyed Facebook users, I'm just waiting for that one great alternative that I can move to along enough contacts to lever the rest over as well. When it comes along, Facebook can kiss my rosy ass.
I'm not sure what the big deal is. We have these things already. We call them "infants" and even half-witted, mouth-breathing hillbillies can make them from the time they're about 12.
Yeah, I realized too late...I plead being tired and sloppy with my terminology. If I remember correctly, Torvalds had a lot more to say early on in the development of the various desktop OS's, almost by default. I'll admit it wasn't something I studied all that closely.
It could be argued that one of the main reasons why Linux has utterly failed as an operating system for average people on average computers is Linus Torvalds. It has certainly been successful in other areas, but as a "just works" freeware replacement for Windows, it's been a bust.
Maybe it would be best if Open Stack stays relatively free of one person's influence, or one clique's interest, for that matter.
Microsoft should quit trying to replace XP and build on its success. Tens of thousands of small businesses use ancient, outdated computers which work flawlessly with their ancient, outdated peripherals. XP is all they want or need. For example, what use does a small garage have for a modern computer? Office 2007 meets their business needs. Dial-up internet access is enough to keep them in touch with customers and suppliers. They might still generate their bills on a dot matrix printer with one of those old typewriter ribbons.
It's a good bet a lot of places like this have been replacing worn out machines with ones from home that were rejected by their teenage kids. I know one garage that's still running on Pentium 3's. The owner has no interest whatsoever in changing.
Microsoft could leverage a lot of other products by going out of its way to serve this large, almost invisible market, because the people who own and operate these businesses have kids, and the kids are where new tech will find a ready market.
This might be a heaven-sent opportunity to force the copyright Nazis into court on the OTHER side. The RIAA is already involved in a lawsuit intended to make sharing one's Netflix password illegal. It seems to me that dragging Netflix into court for this instance of piracy might also force the RIAA or one of its sister groups into court, and get them involved in a nice, bloody dust-up with people who can fight back.
If nothing else, it should create some case law in Finland that might apply more widely in Europe and serve to limit the depredations of these creeps.
To be fair, there have been many protests against the Taliban over the attempted murder of Malala Yousufzai. In Pakistan, especially, outrage against the Taliban has led to large, angry protests.
Yes, there's a lot of work to be done, but my point was that spending several billions of dollars on improving something that has actually been proved to work offers a bit more chance of short-term payoff than fusion. I think we're now at the point where technology to produce a fusion reaction that might be useful for power generation is about 50 years away. Thirty years ago it was also 50 years away, and from the way these guys are going, it will still be 50 years away in another couple or three decades.
It would really help if you made even the slightest effort to inform yourself about the subject at hand before shooting off your mouth.
Google "thorium" or "thorium reactor" and see what pops up. Then think about what throwing a few billion dollars at the situation could do.
I'm going to take it on faith you aren't such a complete twit you commented without being aware five out of seven types of thorium reactor under development have already been in service at some point.
There needs to be a very detailed account of what these people have been doing with public funds. Renewable energy in the form of wind, solar, tidal and geothermal generation cannot replace fossil fuels fast enough to keep Global Warming within reasonable limits, but all show promise.
We've already wasted too much time, and now we need some kind of generation technology to bridge the gap. Imagine what that money could have done helping develop a small, safe, easy-to-build thorium reactor, or overcoming the issues delaying wholesale change to LED lighting.
I trust you realize there's a difference between creating a situation and allowing the situation to continue when the guys who created it are metaphorically holding a gun to your head?
From TFA: The choices offered are "Yes", "No", "I don't know this person" and "I don't want to answer". I don't understand how they forgot to include an option saying "Go fuck yourself, Zuckerberg, you fascist prick".
In fairness, the easiest thing to do is just lie. My Facebook profile is so full of lies it almost makes Romney look honest. My friends all know the truth, and everybody else who cares that much about whether I'm 25, 35 or 45 can join Zuckerberg in the line to Honk On Bobo.
An Australian beer called "Black Swan" would probably survive atomic bombardment as well as any other beer. On the other hand, its effects on the digestive system are such that anybody stuck in a fallout shelter with somebody who had been drinking it would willingly go outside to frolic in the radioactive ash and breathe less contaminated air.
Slashdot Mirror
I just heard an interview with a forensic accountant who served as an expert witness for the plaintiffs. He said he was surprised the prosecution tried to make its case on the most difficult, least provable grounds possible. He also suggested other lines of attack that would have been much more likely to get a conviction.
For anybody interested, the interview was on the CBC Radio show Metro Morning.
This is just a case of following the good old, tried and true tax department/RIAA solution. You go after the small, weak, vulnerable targets. The big ones are likely to defend themselves with armies of lawyers and keep your sorry ass in court for the next hundred years.
Basically, it's much easier and safer to kick a dog with no teeth.
A very large number of Americans, mostly located south of the Mason-Dixon Line and/or in low-population states that are grossly over-represented in government, are too willfully ignorant, too stupid, too inbred and too ill-educated to adapt to a different system of measurement.
They're simply not up to the job, and due to the current political system in the United States, they call the shots on anything involving change.
So this is a dead issue.
We already have a vomiting robot. Every time my buddy mixes beer and wine, he turns into the ReTardis. We call him that because, based on production, he has to be larger inside than outside.
My buddy's dad is in his late 80's. Because the computer gave him tools he wanted to use (communication with a family out west, moving a whole lifetime of photographs, slides, 8mm and Super-8 movies going back over a hundred years into digital format, finding in mere seconds information that would have involved a trip to the library when he was a kid), my friend's dad learned how to operate a computer. And because he's the kind of man who does things properly, he took the trouble to learn how to stay safe on-line. His son, ironically, sounds a lot like your uncle. Put together a short PowerPoint presentation illustrating some of the bad stuff, teach him how to behave, and tell him to either get a brain or get off-line.
We live in a digital age. Uncle Dinosaur should learn to swim in it or leave his on-line business to people who are competent.
ifthat'strueyoushouldsavemoretimebyleavingoutthespaces. obviouslyit'samuchmoreefficientuseofyourprecioustime.
I've got a Google+ account, and I use it with my more geekish friends. It hasn't caught on in the wider community I deal with, though, in spite of my efforts.
My life would be a lot easier if I could move a total of about 3,000 people over to Google+ and get them to spend the minimal amount of time it takes to get comfortable with it. As far as I'm concerned, the interface beats the crap out of Facebook, and the communications tools are superior.
Slow-melting chocolate vibrators. My idea. MINE!
The deodorant companies are right.
I actually need Facebook for scheduling events and informing people in several FB groups about them. It's great for that. And a lot of the people in those groups are just happy enough with it that they'd need a really good reason to change. So to an extent, I'm stuck. However, I have certainly felt no obligation to be truthful with Facebook about my age or any other "facts" in my profile. My friends know what's real and what isn't. Nobody else needs to know.
Facebook has been so dickish toward its users that I can't help but think it's just one good alternative away from oblivion. Google Plus wasn't it. Diaspora was stillborn. Alternatives like Orkut and Friendster have never really caught on in North America, but have been moderately successful elsewhere.
So like millions of perpetually-annoyed Facebook users, I'm just waiting for that one great alternative that I can move to along enough contacts to lever the rest over as well. When it comes along, Facebook can kiss my rosy ass.
I'm not sure what the big deal is. We have these things already. We call them "infants" and even half-witted, mouth-breathing hillbillies can make them from the time they're about 12.
Kindly go fuck yourself. We prefer not to have this place infected with moronic trolls like you.
Thanks for cleaning up my mess. As mentioned earlier, I plead a long, tiring day. You did a better job than I'd have done saying what I wanted to say.
Yeah, I realized too late...I plead being tired and sloppy with my terminology. If I remember correctly, Torvalds had a lot more to say early on in the development of the various desktop OS's, almost by default. I'll admit it wasn't something I studied all that closely.
And Ubuntu is controlled by nobody...because it's about as popular as an STD in a nunnery.
It could be argued that one of the main reasons why Linux has utterly failed as an operating system for average people on average computers is Linus Torvalds. It has certainly been successful in other areas, but as a "just works" freeware replacement for Windows, it's been a bust.
Maybe it would be best if Open Stack stays relatively free of one person's influence, or one clique's interest, for that matter.
Microsoft should quit trying to replace XP and build on its success. Tens of thousands of small businesses use ancient, outdated computers which work flawlessly with their ancient, outdated peripherals. XP is all they want or need. For example, what use does a small garage have for a modern computer? Office 2007 meets their business needs. Dial-up internet access is enough to keep them in touch with customers and suppliers. They might still generate their bills on a dot matrix printer with one of those old typewriter ribbons.
It's a good bet a lot of places like this have been replacing worn out machines with ones from home that were rejected by their teenage kids. I know one garage that's still running on Pentium 3's. The owner has no interest whatsoever in changing.
Microsoft could leverage a lot of other products by going out of its way to serve this large, almost invisible market, because the people who own and operate these businesses have kids, and the kids are where new tech will find a ready market.
This might be a heaven-sent opportunity to force the copyright Nazis into court on the OTHER side. The RIAA is already involved in a lawsuit intended to make sharing one's Netflix password illegal. It seems to me that dragging Netflix into court for this instance of piracy might also force the RIAA or one of its sister groups into court, and get them involved in a nice, bloody dust-up with people who can fight back.
If nothing else, it should create some case law in Finland that might apply more widely in Europe and serve to limit the depredations of these creeps.
To be fair, there have been many protests against the Taliban over the attempted murder of Malala Yousufzai. In Pakistan, especially, outrage against the Taliban has led to large, angry protests.
I guess we're in violent agreement, then.
Yes, there's a lot of work to be done, but my point was that spending several billions of dollars on improving something that has actually been proved to work offers a bit more chance of short-term payoff than fusion. I think we're now at the point where technology to produce a fusion reaction that might be useful for power generation is about 50 years away. Thirty years ago it was also 50 years away, and from the way these guys are going, it will still be 50 years away in another couple or three decades.
It would really help if you made even the slightest effort to inform yourself about the subject at hand before shooting off your mouth.
Google "thorium" or "thorium reactor" and see what pops up. Then think about what throwing a few billion dollars at the situation could do.
I'm going to take it on faith you aren't such a complete twit you commented without being aware five out of seven types of thorium reactor under development have already been in service at some point.
There needs to be a very detailed account of what these people have been doing with public funds. Renewable energy in the form of wind, solar, tidal and geothermal generation cannot replace fossil fuels fast enough to keep Global Warming within reasonable limits, but all show promise.
We've already wasted too much time, and now we need some kind of generation technology to bridge the gap. Imagine what that money could have done helping develop a small, safe, easy-to-build thorium reactor, or overcoming the issues delaying wholesale change to LED lighting.
I trust you realize there's a difference between creating a situation and allowing the situation to continue when the guys who created it are metaphorically holding a gun to your head?
Or maybe you don't.
From TFA: The choices offered are "Yes", "No", "I don't know this person" and "I don't want to answer". I don't understand how they forgot to include an option saying "Go fuck yourself, Zuckerberg, you fascist prick".
In fairness, the easiest thing to do is just lie. My Facebook profile is so full of lies it almost makes Romney look honest. My friends all know the truth, and everybody else who cares that much about whether I'm 25, 35 or 45 can join Zuckerberg in the line to Honk On Bobo.
An Australian beer called "Black Swan" would probably survive atomic bombardment as well as any other beer. On the other hand, its effects on the digestive system are such that anybody stuck in a fallout shelter with somebody who had been drinking it would willingly go outside to frolic in the radioactive ash and breathe less contaminated air.