No, I'm saying "we shouldn't go after Wikileaks, because they broke no laws" is stupid. Assange is like a one man military operation, in an era where because of the ubiquity of computers, one man actually can mount a military operation. Enemy soldiers can be captured or shot, never mind just freezing their assets, even though they have broken no laws.
Wikileaks only managed to turn up any actual misconduct at all because given a really massive quantity of releases, they're bound to turn up something. I'm sure that if every American's private computer hard drive was leaked to the public, there would be evidence in there that someone's a pedophile. That doesn't mean that everyone's computer should be public. There are legitimate reasons for both you and the government to keep things away from public eyes, and if it shelters a couple of pedophiles, then fine.
*Most* of the time, Slashdot recognizes that "we have to release this private information, because it'll help us catch pedophiles" is a really terrible idea.
Lobbing missiles would still be *legal*. It's not murder, because it's not murder under the laws of Iran, and it's not murder under US law because the US has no jurisdiction there.
It's true that Iran doesn't lob missiles because it doesn't want a war. But starting a war is not illegal. Doing so is ill advised because it could lead to them being bombed into the Stone Age, but it's not *against the law*.
If you stream a DVD whose terms prohibit retransmission, or if you mail yourself GPL code, that's covered by fair use. Fair use protects you against the copyright owner going after you for copyright violation. Third parties are still allowed to do things conditional on whether you have the rights.
If the TV set was owned by someone else and he put a terms of use on it which said that you can't stream that DVD, streaming the DVD won't violate copyright (because of fair use), but it *would* violate the terms of use of the TV's owner.
The only reason you can say that Wikileaks didn't break any US law is that they're not located in the US and aren't under US jurisdiction. I'm pretty certain that if they were located in Iran and lobbing missiles at the US they wouldn't be breaking any law, either of the US or Iran. I'm also pretty sure that Visa and Mastercard wouldn't serve them under those circumstances even though their acts are perfectly legal.
Throwing electronic missiles instead of real missiles at the US shouldn't change it.
That's a scam site. The real CycloDS page is located at http://www.cyclopsds.com/ and they have no 3DS cart. In fact that scam site also has fake Acekard, fake EZFlash, and fake Supercard carts for sale, none of which show up on those companies' actual sites
This is not true. There are plenty of piracy cartridges for the DS. There's one for the DSi specifically--the lack of more being because there aren't all that many DSi-specific games either to find exploits in or to play. Unless someone just came out with one in the last day or so, there's nothing whatsoever that lets you pirate 3DS games.
Pokemon Ranger has the Manaphy mission. You can finish the mission and get a Manaphy to download to your main-series Pokemon game.
The Manaphy is obtained as part of Ranger Net. Clearing the save and starting a new game doesn't clear Ranger Net. As a result, you can only do this once per cartridge, ever.
"I'd be expecting such a term" is something that comes from your experience as an accountant. This guy is neither an accountant nor a lawyer and wouldn't be expecting such a term.
RTFA. Each time you rip from a disk, the rip is slightly different. If twenty people have the exact same file, they'll know that at least 19 of them didn't get it by ripping disks.
They claim that they put in links to Wikipedia but Amazon removed them.
Considering Amazon, that's perfectly believable, but it still amounts to "Amazon's policies don't allow us to do this legitimately, they only let us do it as a scam". If you can only do it as a scam, then don't do it.
Bill Gates has enough money that even the small portion that is liquid is plenty of money for all the things most people use money for.
But you're right, I oversimplified a little bit. The fact that someone doesn't convert their "money" to real money doesn't prove that it's not valuable. It could just not be very liquid, like most of Bill Gates' wealth. But while it doesn't prove it, it's still one of the warning signs. If I claimed my wristwatch was worth a half a million dollars, and I'm an ordinary guy who could really, really, use having half a million dollars in the bank, the first question by any doubter would be "why don't you sell it? After all, you could use the money." If I don't, it may be that I'm still waiting on the call from the wristwatch broker before I can sell it. Or I'm just a fool with no financial sense to realize he should sell it. But the more likely reason is that I'm just BSing.
Yes, it's an actual PC World article, but it still serves as an ad. I don't know whether the article was written by a shill, or whether PC World got duped, or whether the submitter is being the shill, or whether there's just an overeager fan somewhere in the chain, but this article has the same effect as an ad. What makes it an ad is not the statement that $500000 was stolen, but the implication that it could be worth $500000 in the first place. The story is selling the idea that Bitcoin is real and that when someone steals it that's as meaningful as someone actually stealing real money. So in the guise of reporting a theft of Bitcoins, it's pushing Bitcoins.
Consider how anyone would behave if it was really worth $500000. If you suddenly got $500000 in cash tomorrow, would you put it all into Bitcoins? Of course not. You'd bank it, maybe invest some, and only put a small portion into Bitcoins. Then logically, if your Bitcoins suddenly became worth $500000, you'd take *out* as cash the amount that you'd leave out if it started as cash in the first place. The fact that he had $500000 of Bitcoins in the first place and didn't convert into $490000 of cash and $10000 of Bitcoins shows that it wasn't ever really worth $500000.
Well, if you don't want to work for them, the company is glad to oblige and not let you.
People take jobs because they need to eat and pay the rent. As such, "I don't want to work for them" may be irrelevant if you want starving and going homeless even less.
Is this one of those jobs where the HR department says "your resume says C++, but not.net, and we specifically are looking for people who have experience in.net? Also, we want 5 years of experience on a technology that hasn't existed for 5 years"?
A doctor can say "that patient is dead, but I did my best". Not every disease is always curable, after all. You can tell whether the patient is dead, but you can't tell whether the doctor did all that was possible to save him, since sometimes patients die no matter what you do.
Except it's hard to distinguish between a leftist pretending to be hypocritical to make a point, and a leftist actually being hypocritical. There are plenty of people who believe such conspiracy theories about Bush in the first place, support Obama, and insist in digging up dirt on Bush, Palin, and anyone else not on Obama's side, and they're not doing it to make a point--they really believe it.
News organizations and "citizens" demanded Palin's email in the first place because nobody is going to have 24000 emails without at least a few that sound bad, and it will give them a new excuse to bash Palin, And they certainly don't want Obama treated the same way, and there's no hint of having this double standard just to make a point.
(Besides, if Bush conspiracy theories are just making a point in response to Obama conspiracy theories, who's to say the Obama conspiracy theory isn't making a point in response to the initial Palin bashing?)
Actually writing an article about Bitcoin problems would require maybe 4 lines describing what Bitcoin is, and *no* lines referring to "misconceptions" that people have about how bad Bitcoin is, nothing referring to "unfunded paranoia", and no market-speak.
Slashdot Mirror
No, I'm saying "we shouldn't go after Wikileaks, because they broke no laws" is stupid. Assange is like a one man military operation, in an era where because of the ubiquity of computers, one man actually can mount a military operation. Enemy soldiers can be captured or shot, never mind just freezing their assets, even though they have broken no laws.
Wikileaks only managed to turn up any actual misconduct at all because given a really massive quantity of releases, they're bound to turn up something. I'm sure that if every American's private computer hard drive was leaked to the public, there would be evidence in there that someone's a pedophile. That doesn't mean that everyone's computer should be public. There are legitimate reasons for both you and the government to keep things away from public eyes, and if it shelters a couple of pedophiles, then fine.
*Most* of the time, Slashdot recognizes that "we have to release this private information, because it'll help us catch pedophiles" is a really terrible idea.
Lobbing missiles would still be *legal*. It's not murder, because it's not murder under the laws of Iran, and it's not murder under US law because the US has no jurisdiction there.
It's true that Iran doesn't lob missiles because it doesn't want a war. But starting a war is not illegal. Doing so is ill advised because it could lead to them being bombed into the Stone Age, but it's not *against the law*.
If you stream a DVD whose terms prohibit retransmission, or if you mail yourself GPL code, that's covered by fair use. Fair use protects you against the copyright owner going after you for copyright violation. Third parties are still allowed to do things conditional on whether you have the rights.
If the TV set was owned by someone else and he put a terms of use on it which said that you can't stream that DVD, streaming the DVD won't violate copyright (because of fair use), but it *would* violate the terms of use of the TV's owner.
The only reason you can say that Wikileaks didn't break any US law is that they're not located in the US and aren't under US jurisdiction. I'm pretty certain that if they were located in Iran and lobbing missiles at the US they wouldn't be breaking any law, either of the US or Iran. I'm also pretty sure that Visa and Mastercard wouldn't serve them under those circumstances even though their acts are perfectly legal.
Throwing electronic missiles instead of real missiles at the US shouldn't change it.
That's a scam site. The real CycloDS page is located at http://www.cyclopsds.com/ and they have no 3DS cart. In fact that scam site also has fake Acekard, fake EZFlash, and fake Supercard carts for sale, none of which show up on those companies' actual sites
No, it doesn't (unless there's a *very* recent update). It supports DS games on a 3DS.
This is not true. There are plenty of piracy cartridges for the DS. There's one for the DSi specifically--the lack of more being because there aren't all that many DSi-specific games either to find exploits in or to play. Unless someone just came out with one in the last day or so, there's nothing whatsoever that lets you pirate 3DS games.
Pokemon Ranger has the Manaphy mission. You can finish the mission and get a Manaphy to download to your main-series Pokemon game.
The Manaphy is obtained as part of Ranger Net. Clearing the save and starting a new game doesn't clear Ranger Net. As a result, you can only do this once per cartridge, ever.
"I'd be expecting such a term" is something that comes from your experience as an accountant. This guy is neither an accountant nor a lawyer and wouldn't be expecting such a term.
RTFA. Each time you rip from a disk, the rip is slightly different. If twenty people have the exact same file, they'll know that at least 19 of them didn't get it by ripping disks.
Don't forget the warrantless wiretapping.
They claim that they put in links to Wikipedia but Amazon removed them.
Considering Amazon, that's perfectly believable, but it still amounts to "Amazon's policies don't allow us to do this legitimately, they only let us do it as a scam". If you can only do it as a scam, then don't do it.
Farms are pretty big. Covering one entirely with security cameras is going to be hard. And security cameras cost money to maintain.
Bill Gates has enough money that even the small portion that is liquid is plenty of money for all the things most people use money for.
But you're right, I oversimplified a little bit. The fact that someone doesn't convert their "money" to real money doesn't prove that it's not valuable. It could just not be very liquid, like most of Bill Gates' wealth. But while it doesn't prove it, it's still one of the warning signs. If I claimed my wristwatch was worth a half a million dollars, and I'm an ordinary guy who could really, really, use having half a million dollars in the bank, the first question by any doubter would be "why don't you sell it? After all, you could use the money." If I don't, it may be that I'm still waiting on the call from the wristwatch broker before I can sell it. Or I'm just a fool with no financial sense to realize he should sell it. But the more likely reason is that I'm just BSing.
It's advertising "Bitcoins are just like real money."
Yes, it's an actual PC World article, but it still serves as an ad. I don't know whether the article was written by a shill, or whether PC World got duped, or whether the submitter is being the shill, or whether there's just an overeager fan somewhere in the chain, but this article has the same effect as an ad. What makes it an ad is not the statement that $500000 was stolen, but the implication that it could be worth $500000 in the first place. The story is selling the idea that Bitcoin is real and that when someone steals it that's as meaningful as someone actually stealing real money. So in the guise of reporting a theft of Bitcoins, it's pushing Bitcoins.
Consider how anyone would behave if it was really worth $500000. If you suddenly got $500000 in cash tomorrow, would you put it all into Bitcoins? Of course not. You'd bank it, maybe invest some, and only put a small portion into Bitcoins. Then logically, if your Bitcoins suddenly became worth $500000, you'd take *out* as cash the amount that you'd leave out if it started as cash in the first place. The fact that he had $500000 of Bitcoins in the first place and didn't convert into $490000 of cash and $10000 of Bitcoins shows that it wasn't ever really worth $500000.
I've never heard of an order being an "illegal order" because it endangers the person carrying it out, rather than because it hurts a third party.
Well, if you don't want to work for them, the company is glad to oblige and not let you.
People take jobs because they need to eat and pay the rent. As such, "I don't want to work for them" may be irrelevant if you want starving and going homeless even less.
Is this one of those jobs where the HR department says "your resume says C++, but not .net, and we specifically are looking for people who have experience in .net? Also, we want 5 years of experience on a technology that hasn't existed for 5 years"?
High European taxes need to taken into account when deciding that a job pays decently.
A doctor can say "that patient is dead, but I did my best". Not every disease is always curable, after all. You can tell whether the patient is dead, but you can't tell whether the doctor did all that was possible to save him, since sometimes patients die no matter what you do.
They can still draft you and send you on a suicide mission.
Except it's hard to distinguish between a leftist pretending to be hypocritical to make a point, and a leftist actually being hypocritical. There are plenty of people who believe such conspiracy theories about Bush in the first place, support Obama, and insist in digging up dirt on Bush, Palin, and anyone else not on Obama's side, and they're not doing it to make a point--they really believe it.
News organizations and "citizens" demanded Palin's email in the first place because nobody is going to have 24000 emails without at least a few that sound bad, and it will give them a new excuse to bash Palin, And they certainly don't want Obama treated the same way, and there's no hint of having this double standard just to make a point.
(Besides, if Bush conspiracy theories are just making a point in response to Obama conspiracy theories, who's to say the Obama conspiracy theory isn't making a point in response to the initial Palin bashing?)
Actually writing an article about Bitcoin problems would require maybe 4 lines describing what Bitcoin is, and *no* lines referring to "misconceptions" that people have about how bad Bitcoin is, nothing referring to "unfunded paranoia", and no market-speak.