I too refuse to show my ID when leaving Fry's, however I can't agree (at least from my experience) that Fry's is the worst. At the most their security persons seem to be reasonably aware that they don't have the rights to detain me for simply refusing to show my receipt.
I'd say that Circuit City is now the worst (and Best Buy and TigerDirect also have poor reputations for this same crap).
Personally I'm sick and tired of being treated like a criminal whenever I leave a store. I myself always refuse to show a receipt and would have probably done the same thing that this guy did (although I would have probably shown my ID to the police officer).
Please note that I am not condoning harassment of any sort, one phone call should be sufficient to the Brooklyn Ohio CC -- should anyone actually feel like calling and voicing their opinion:
I called to let them know my days shopping at Circuit City have come to an end. That makes Best Buy and CC both for me now. Fortunately there is an abundance of electronics stores where I live.
Nothing against nmap(1), I think it's a great tool, and I use it myself. I just sounds like these goobers sit around bragging about how they figured out how to use nmap. I mean, big deal, it's just a simple tool, nothing to break your arm patting yourself on the back about. You don't get to call yourself a hacker just because you read the man page.
I say means to me because this is not a legal interpretation or viewpoint; simply my personal viewpoint.
To me, the right to freedom of speech also includes the freedom not to listen to speech. I don't believe others' rights should be impuned, and I'm happy if mine aren't as well. However I don't believe that it means I'm required to supply others with the platform by which they may express themselves. They have the right to talk, I feel that I have the right to listen or not listen.
We live in a country where we can pretty much say whatever we like about whomever we like (with reasonable boundaries and limitations of course), but nothing that I can imagine requires anyone to have to endure or listen to it (even Bush).
In response to today's Daily Herald article (and I quote) SCO, which had also spent millions of dollars in its four-and-a-half year legal campaign, is, as one worker puts it, "sticking it out to the end. The floor may be gone, but we're still hanging on to the pipes."
My advice to SCO employees: put down those crack pipes and look for another job if you can.
Advertisements that come inserted into your bills...
You are required, at your place of employment to endure compulsory marketing.
What's next, tatoos in the inside of eyelids when you're born?
In the world of marketing it seems there are no bad ideas. Overstep boundaries, go to far, garner enough negative attention and you're still golden. It's about brand recognition, not about stimulating support for a product.
Personally I've become revolted by all forms of marketing. I'm "turned off and tuned out"... to paraphrase what I feel.
I'm waiting for a consumer revolution in a world of sheep.
Sigh. I know I'm going to probably get modded "Flaimbait" for this, but here goes anyway...
It's only been two years since the CD rootkit scandal and already it seems the consumers have either forgotten or forgiven Sony. So please bear with me while I just take a moment to point out that there are probably still holdouts like me out there who *really* meant it when we said we would never buy from Sony ever again.
We now continue with your regularly commercial sheep-like programming existance where electronics are mass-marketed to you as shiny new objects.
In the past, businesses have been unwilling to support certain devices, like those with cameras, for instance, because of concerns employees could use them to document company secrets.
Oh please, give me a break. Removable media such as USB devices pose a much greater threat to corporate IP than camera phones, at least in IT environments. If you don't trust the people working for you then the game is already over.
I've bought several pre-installed Linux systems (desktops and notebooks) from Red Seven Linux here in Phoenix. I have no idea if they have any type of phone order services (and no, I don't work for them:-)
The label cartels can have DRM, high-priced tunes, no-DRM, whatever they like, I honestly don't care. There seems to be this notion that if the media barons give in a little bit and waver on the DRM issues that people will be willing to spend more, perhaps even more than what the songs are worth. Perhaps this is true for some consumers; however, only speaking for myself I can hold out for DRM-free music at a price that I feel is fair.
Otherwise, I'm perfectly happy with just not having their music at all. I can do without it, completely! If they can do without my dollars then I guess everyone is happy.
I could understand the decision to remove the decryption key from articles that were irrelevant to the subject of HD-DVD encrytion itself; even if it were an act of insurrection. However preventing the creation of an article about the encryption key, including censoring any discussion of it in their Talk forums smacks of blatant hypocrisy, keeping in mind that they have articles that are much more explicit.
For instance, the Wikipedia article on DeCSS itself has actual SOURCE CODE to DeCSS, links to DeCSS code galleries and technical discussions of DeCSS.
A court in Dubai has ruled that a man can divorce his wife by sending her a text message. Abdel Salam Mohammad Darwash sent a message to his wife's mobile phone which simply read: "Why are you late? You are divorced."
Two hours after sending the message, Mr Darwash regretted his message and the couple went to court to determine whether or not they were in fact divorced.
Under Islamic Sharia law, a man can divorce his wife by a stating "I divorce thee" three times. If he makes the statement only twice, the husband can change his decision within three months. Women do not share this right. The Dubai court found that a text message is a valid means of communicating the statement.
Of course, it's VERIO's network, they're free to have whomever they like as customers. I just find it dubious that they're TOS'ing Young for abuse or violations of their AUP when they simultaneously decide to host spamming scum:
The CAN-SPAM act is terrible legislation, not because of what it attempted to accomplish, but because of what it actually accomplished: Nothing. Even worse, it failed to criminalize spam, effectively legitimizing it.
Aside from that the law has no real teeth. You can't seek redress from spammers unless you're an Attorney General or an ISP.
Slashdot Mirror
I too refuse to show my ID when leaving Fry's, however I can't agree (at least from my experience) that Fry's is the worst. At the most their security persons seem to be reasonably aware that they don't have the rights to detain me for simply refusing to show my receipt.
I'd say that Circuit City is now the worst (and Best Buy and TigerDirect also have poor reputations for this same crap).
Personally I'm sick and tired of being treated like a criminal whenever I leave a store. I myself always refuse to show a receipt and would have probably done the same thing that this guy did (although I would have probably shown my ID to the police officer).
Please note that I am not condoning harassment of any sort, one phone call should be sufficient to the Brooklyn Ohio CC -- should anyone actually feel like calling and voicing their opinion:
7349 Northcliff Avenue
Brooklyn, OH 44144
(216) 749-5960
I called to let them know my days shopping at Circuit City have come to an end. That makes Best Buy and CC both for me now. Fortunately there is an abundance of electronics stores where I live.
Nothing against nmap(1), I think it's a great tool, and I use it myself. I just sounds like these goobers sit around bragging about how they figured out how to use nmap. I mean, big deal, it's just a simple tool, nothing to break your arm patting yourself on the back about. You don't get to call yourself a hacker just because you read the man page.
Now Fyodor, the author of nmap. There's a hacker.
I say means to me because this is not a legal interpretation or viewpoint; simply my personal viewpoint.
To me, the right to freedom of speech also includes the freedom not to listen to speech. I don't believe others' rights should be impuned, and I'm happy if mine aren't as well. However I don't believe that it means I'm required to supply others with the platform by which they may express themselves. They have the right to talk, I feel that I have the right to listen or not listen.
We live in a country where we can pretty much say whatever we like about whomever we like (with reasonable boundaries and limitations of course), but nothing that I can imagine requires anyone to have to endure or listen to it (even Bush).
the ad-blocking browser using blocker blockers are blocked by you
In response to today's Daily Herald article (and I quote) SCO, which had also spent millions of dollars in its four-and-a-half year legal campaign, is, as one worker puts it, "sticking it out to the end. The floor may be gone, but we're still hanging on to the pipes."
My advice to SCO employees: put down those crack pipes and look for another job if you can.
They're dilithium crystals, ye insensitive clod!
An OS that watches you and markets products to you... far off ?
...
A TV station that markets to you during your favorite program
Advertisements that come inserted into your bills
You are required, at your place of employment to endure compulsory marketing.
What's next, tatoos in the inside of eyelids when you're born?
In the world of marketing it seems there are no bad ideas. Overstep boundaries, go to far, garner enough negative attention and you're still golden. It's about brand recognition, not about stimulating support for a product.
Personally I've become revolted by all forms of marketing. I'm "turned off and tuned out"... to paraphrase what I feel.
I'm waiting for a consumer revolution in a world of sheep.
this ass clown is getting tons of free publicity.
there's a space toilet.
Sigh. I know I'm going to probably get modded "Flaimbait" for this, but here goes anyway...
It's only been two years since the CD rootkit scandal and already it seems the consumers have either forgotten or forgiven Sony. So please bear with me while I just take a moment to point out that there are probably still holdouts like me out there who *really* meant it when we said we would never buy from Sony ever again.
We now continue with your regularly commercial sheep-like programming existance where electronics are mass-marketed to you as shiny new objects.
In the past, businesses have been unwilling to support certain devices, like those with cameras, for instance, because of concerns employees could use them to document company secrets.
Oh please, give me a break. Removable media such as USB devices pose a much greater threat to corporate IP than camera phones, at least in IT environments. If you don't trust the people working for you then the game is already over.
I've bought several pre-installed Linux systems (desktops and notebooks) from Red Seven Linux here in Phoenix. I have no idea if they have any type of phone order services (and no, I don't work for them :-)
"Oh shit! I said shit!" .. "oh no, I said it again!"
NI!
... Get your free iPod here.
*rips up joke and wanders off in disgust*
Wow. That's actually kind of an interesting idea, in a "William Wallace" kind of way.
Open source PalmOS.
Seriously.
The label cartels can have DRM, high-priced tunes, no-DRM, whatever they like, I honestly don't care. There seems to be this notion that if the media barons give in a little bit and waver on the DRM issues that people will be willing to spend more, perhaps even more than what the songs are worth. Perhaps this is true for some consumers; however, only speaking for myself I can hold out for DRM-free music at a price that I feel is fair.
Otherwise, I'm perfectly happy with just not having their music at all. I can do without it, completely! If they can do without my dollars then I guess everyone is happy.
I could understand the decision to remove the decryption key from articles that were irrelevant to the subject of HD-DVD encrytion itself; even if it were an act of insurrection. However preventing the creation of an article about the encryption key, including censoring any discussion of it in their Talk forums smacks of blatant hypocrisy, keeping in mind that they have articles that are much more explicit.
For instance, the Wikipedia article on DeCSS itself has actual SOURCE CODE to DeCSS, links to DeCSS code galleries and technical discussions of DeCSS.
SCO always succeeds in making me gag.
I confess I don't know what this expression means. Does it have anything to do with Henry Winkler and/or the Fonze?
A court in Dubai has ruled that a man can divorce his wife by sending her a text message. Abdel Salam Mohammad Darwash sent a message to his wife's mobile phone which simply read: "Why are you late? You are divorced."
Two hours after sending the message, Mr Darwash regretted his message and the couple went to court to determine whether or not they were in fact divorced.
Under Islamic Sharia law, a man can divorce his wife by a stating "I divorce thee" three times. If he makes the statement only twice, the husband can change his decision within three months. Women do not share this right. The Dubai court found that a text message is a valid means of communicating the statement.
http://www.out-law.com/page-1763
Of course, it's VERIO's network, they're free to have whomever they like as customers. I just find it dubious that they're TOS'ing Young for abuse or violations of their AUP when they simultaneously decide to host spamming scum:
r io.net
http://www.spamhaus.org/sbl/listings.lasso?isp=ve
The CAN-SPAM act is terrible legislation, not because of what it attempted to accomplish, but because of what it actually accomplished: Nothing. Even worse, it failed to criminalize spam, effectively legitimizing it.
Aside from that the law has no real teeth. You can't seek redress from spammers unless you're an Attorney General or an ISP.