Fisher really sounds like a paranoid schizophrenic. They think that people are out to get them and stuff--whether it's aliens, the CIA, or a cabal of evil Jews. It seems to fit, but I do not think he's ever been diagnosed as such (or would have let a doctor close enough to do so).
Criminal cases normally do not involve a lot of evidence. You have the police report, the coroner's report, witness reports, and forensics. Neither side has an incentive to flood the other side with documents. In a patent litigation, or actually any sort of modern civil litigation, you have to produce and read thousands of e-mails, computer files, paper documents, expert reports, depositions, etc. You want to hide the smoking gun memo. In fact, firms routinely hire short-term contract attorneys just to read these documents and pick out the good ones.
All that said, the bulk of the 4,000 page complaint is probably a huge affidavit or appendix listing IP addresses or torrents. To come up with 4,000 of legal writing that an attorney is responsible for is beyond the pale.
Well, what's the difference between me intentionally running a dude over and accidentally hitting him? That's the difference between an accident, negligence, and an intentional act, and our criminal justice system recognizes this.
This post evinces a basic misunderstanding of your obligations under this new rule. A company that is not sued or is not reasonably anticipating a lawsuit may have a data retention policy, which is commonly "we destroy all e-mails after ninety days, and we do not keep any backups." Once they are sued or notified of a suit, then they have to suspend that policy and keep the e-mails and electronic documents created by the relevant executives and employees. The company has a problem only if the data destruction policy is not uniformly followed and bad e-mails just suddenly disappear. (Note to bad people: if you e-mail a smoking gun document to another company, you should produce it because the other side will know it exists.)
The AC-130U Spectre (code-named "Spooky") has been a very accurate weapon of war. It flies really slowly, which increases its accuracy when firing on ground targets. It can loiter over its target for hours. The latest versions of the aircraft have gyro-stabilized mounts for its weapons, and advanced night optics that can see through smoke grenades. Its radar can track the 40mm and 105mm shells it shoots and feedback the information to the aircraft to adjust the aim of later rounds. The aircraft can accurately attack two targets up to a kilometer away at the same time. Accurately aiming a weapon fired from a AC-130U at a ground target has been a problem that has been adequately addressed for some time already.
Napalm is sticky gasoline, and that's legal. Well, at least the United States uses it in its wars. But interestingly, if you drop a person in burning napalm, he won't feel too much pain because the third-degree burns will kill all the nerves that would be otherwise sending pain signals. It's the guys who get splattered with a bit who suffer. I guess a giant laser beam would vaporize?
"Wondering why I talk to Dave like this? Read his home page. You don't even have to read between the lines."
Because ad hominem attacks are suddenly justified if the target is associated with the US government? Prove his statement wrong; that would impress me more.
Sixty nine people died at Chernobyl the same way no one died from smoking, the same way no one died from the proper use of guns, and no one suffers from Gulf War syndrome.
This comment was long overdue. The article ostensibly dealt with computer privacy, but the real topic is how to avoid leaving fingerprints when using your work e-mail. In other words, corporate counsel is teaching their bosses how to avoid writing "the smoking gun memo." Remember--it's not destroying evidence if you're just telling them not to create evidence in the first place! I recall being a part of conversations along the lines of, "It's your practice and habit to not save drafts of documents you create, isn't that right?" More corporate ass-covering masquerading as commonsense privacy.
Do you think a new firmware issued by OSS source code hackers can address the problem? I mean, Verizon should be jumping on this possibility of reducing costs.
That's not true. For instance, judge threw out deposition testimony of an executive because there was conflicting documentation. The testimony and the documents both met evidentiary requirements. The judge simply decided that the executive was less trustworthy than the paper. He may be right, but that's for the jury to decide.
Or even less revolutionary, Netflix will redesign the mailers to look like BlockBusters, unless BB patented their envelopes. I haven't found any such patents in my preliminary search, but who knows what is going on nowadays with patents?
Well, that's a good point if you want to take your cues on good behavior from Islamic terrorists. If we do this, we can say "We're better than the head-cutters" but we can't say "We're a free country" or "We have civil rights" or "The Terrorists Hate Our Freedom!" Not hypocritically, anyway.
The blogger is not trolling. He actually makes a good point: judges are not allowed to play the fact-finder on summary judgment--this would deprive the litigants their right to a jury trial. That's legal minutiae, however, to those who hate SCO and are happy to see it lose. SCO pretty much was losing this thing and a jury trial would have just dragged everything longer. Summary judgment probably saves everyone a lot of time. BUT the thing is that we have to be consistent in our applications of law so we get fair trials, not judicial viligantism. That's the point the blogger was making, and after reading the decision, I agree with the assessment.
I don't believe Michael Bay either, but how deliciously evil would this be if Microsoft actually planned this? This is the kind of evilness that requires a slow clap.
Well, make sure that $999 buys you complete confidentiality of the results of your genome. Preferably, they should provide you the genome sequencing, and then delete all the information from their systems. You don't know what the future holds, and if you think giving your search results to Google is a great enough violation of privacy, try having a private company having your entire genome and tell me how that feels.
Personally, I'd wait until some poor schmuck sues a genome company for violating his privacy and getting a billion dollars in damages before I get my genome sequenced.
Cute. But if you're a young, GAY, white male then discriminating against you is illegal under New York State law (not federal law). The PC police have everyone under protection.
Modern nerve agents are absorbed through the skin in lethal amounts. Holding your breath, wearing a respirator, or sucking through a piss-drenched sock is not going to help you. Try to get away from the nerve agent, get outside, and hope there wasn't a lot of it.
Slashdot Mirror
Fisher really sounds like a paranoid schizophrenic. They think that people are out to get them and stuff--whether it's aliens, the CIA, or a cabal of evil Jews. It seems to fit, but I do not think he's ever been diagnosed as such (or would have let a doctor close enough to do so).
Criminal cases normally do not involve a lot of evidence. You have the police report, the coroner's report, witness reports, and forensics. Neither side has an incentive to flood the other side with documents. In a patent litigation, or actually any sort of modern civil litigation, you have to produce and read thousands of e-mails, computer files, paper documents, expert reports, depositions, etc. You want to hide the smoking gun memo. In fact, firms routinely hire short-term contract attorneys just to read these documents and pick out the good ones.
All that said, the bulk of the 4,000 page complaint is probably a huge affidavit or appendix listing IP addresses or torrents. To come up with 4,000 of legal writing that an attorney is responsible for is beyond the pale.
Well, what's the difference between me intentionally running a dude over and accidentally hitting him? That's the difference between an accident, negligence, and an intentional act, and our criminal justice system recognizes this.
Liquid sodium nuclear reactors run under lower pressure, so the structures don't have to suffer so much.
Dude. It's KITT! Why do you think that there has to be someone in the car? As long as the car won't fly apart at these G rates perhaps it makes sense!
This post evinces a basic misunderstanding of your obligations under this new rule. A company that is not sued or is not reasonably anticipating a lawsuit may have a data retention policy, which is commonly "we destroy all e-mails after ninety days, and we do not keep any backups." Once they are sued or notified of a suit, then they have to suspend that policy and keep the e-mails and electronic documents created by the relevant executives and employees. The company has a problem only if the data destruction policy is not uniformly followed and bad e-mails just suddenly disappear. (Note to bad people: if you e-mail a smoking gun document to another company, you should produce it because the other side will know it exists.)
The pre-fetch deals with the code necessary to load the program. After the program starts, it will use more memory.
The AC-130U Spectre (code-named "Spooky") has been a very accurate weapon of war. It flies really slowly, which increases its accuracy when firing on ground targets. It can loiter over its target for hours. The latest versions of the aircraft have gyro-stabilized mounts for its weapons, and advanced night optics that can see through smoke grenades. Its radar can track the 40mm and 105mm shells it shoots and feedback the information to the aircraft to adjust the aim of later rounds. The aircraft can accurately attack two targets up to a kilometer away at the same time. Accurately aiming a weapon fired from a AC-130U at a ground target has been a problem that has been adequately addressed for some time already.
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/ac-130.htm
Napalm is sticky gasoline, and that's legal. Well, at least the United States uses it in its wars. But interestingly, if you drop a person in burning napalm, he won't feel too much pain because the third-degree burns will kill all the nerves that would be otherwise sending pain signals. It's the guys who get splattered with a bit who suffer. I guess a giant laser beam would vaporize?
http://www.globalsecurity.org/org/news/2003/030810-napalm-iraq01.htm
"Wondering why I talk to Dave like this? Read his home page. You don't even have to read between the lines."
Because ad hominem attacks are suddenly justified if the target is associated with the US government? Prove his statement wrong; that would impress me more.
Sixty nine people died at Chernobyl the same way no one died from smoking, the same way no one died from the proper use of guns, and no one suffers from Gulf War syndrome.
This comment was long overdue. The article ostensibly dealt with computer privacy, but the real topic is how to avoid leaving fingerprints when using your work e-mail. In other words, corporate counsel is teaching their bosses how to avoid writing "the smoking gun memo." Remember--it's not destroying evidence if you're just telling them not to create evidence in the first place! I recall being a part of conversations along the lines of, "It's your practice and habit to not save drafts of documents you create, isn't that right?" More corporate ass-covering masquerading as commonsense privacy.
Do you think a new firmware issued by OSS source code hackers can address the problem? I mean, Verizon should be jumping on this possibility of reducing costs.
That's not true. For instance, judge threw out deposition testimony of an executive because there was conflicting documentation. The testimony and the documents both met evidentiary requirements. The judge simply decided that the executive was less trustworthy than the paper. He may be right, but that's for the jury to decide.
Or even less revolutionary, Netflix will redesign the mailers to look like BlockBusters, unless BB patented their envelopes. I haven't found any such patents in my preliminary search, but who knows what is going on nowadays with patents?
Ground-based satelittes have to spin with the Earth. This prevents them from having the super-long exposure times that Hubble can achieve.
Well, that's a good point if you want to take your cues on good behavior from Islamic terrorists. If we do this, we can say "We're better than the head-cutters" but we can't say "We're a free country" or "We have civil rights" or "The Terrorists Hate Our Freedom!" Not hypocritically, anyway.
The blogger is not trolling. He actually makes a good point: judges are not allowed to play the fact-finder on summary judgment--this would deprive the litigants their right to a jury trial. That's legal minutiae, however, to those who hate SCO and are happy to see it lose. SCO pretty much was losing this thing and a jury trial would have just dragged everything longer. Summary judgment probably saves everyone a lot of time. BUT the thing is that we have to be consistent in our applications of law so we get fair trials, not judicial viligantism. That's the point the blogger was making, and after reading the decision, I agree with the assessment.
I don't believe Michael Bay either, but how deliciously evil would this be if Microsoft actually planned this? This is the kind of evilness that requires a slow clap.
Can we stop using the phrase "cut-and-run"? It's empty political rhetoric coopted by those who associate realism with cowardice.
That's why it isn't protected under federal law, but it is protected under New York State law. Make all the jokes you want aboout NYC.
Well, make sure that $999 buys you complete confidentiality of the results of your genome. Preferably, they should provide you the genome sequencing, and then delete all the information from their systems. You don't know what the future holds, and if you think giving your search results to Google is a great enough violation of privacy, try having a private company having your entire genome and tell me how that feels.
Personally, I'd wait until some poor schmuck sues a genome company for violating his privacy and getting a billion dollars in damages before I get my genome sequenced.
Cute. But if you're a young, GAY, white male then discriminating against you is illegal under New York State law (not federal law). The PC police have everyone under protection.
Modern nerve agents are absorbed through the skin in lethal amounts. Holding your breath, wearing a respirator, or sucking through a piss-drenched sock is not going to help you. Try to get away from the nerve agent, get outside, and hope there wasn't a lot of it.
A distasteful but accurate name for this strategy is called the "Kevorkian."