Although I am not from the UK nor do I know if this applies but my question would be this. If you are the one making the comment how can you not own the statement? Isn't email seen just as a written letter that one has to answer for if something derogatory or defaming said?
Not to be a jerk here... But the memo doesn't state that they can't use the cell phone apps while driving (that line is at the end). The memo states that those type of apps like Uber are not allowed due to a contractual obligation that they (The commission) has made with payment processors. It also points out that it could also cause problems with the rules for prearranged rides provision in the law.
Sorry I disagree. The dispatcher is NOT law enforcement they have no legal grounds to give you an order to comply. I was involved in a hit and run accident. They went through and I was following the person. They told me to cease following the person. I couldn't get insurance to cover the repairs to my car for 30 days while they "looked" for the person who hit my car. If I get in the same situation I want something done about it.
I respectfully disagree with your thoughts on this situation and use of the Times Ethics policy.
First off this wasn't a case where the reporter PURPOSELY went in and "tapped" the line, or even they pushed the button to enable the sound to be sent to that room. The fact is what happened is someone some place pushed the wrong button. When they pushed said button and sound was enabled in that room of the conversation then it became public. Though things sometimes are said in meetings because no one thinks you are being heard doesn't make it right. We all should take responsibility for the things we say.
I believe that it was newsworthy. Given what was said and in the response it was aimed at makes the US look bad. There is no need for such disrespect towards other countries officials at all. I am sorry but I do not BELIEVE that anyone person should have the right to deem something newsworthy or not.
I think we all as computer geeks, and various other geeks can all relate to the products and innovation that he helped (either personally or via collective of RnD) put a spin on for the general public. I wish I could have had the pleasure of meeting him one day. He will be extremely missed. It is because of Apple that I even learned to pursue computers to being with. It all started with a Macintosh at a school and ended up spending a life time learning.
To his family, friends, and the rest of the tech community I am sorry for our loss but I am glad for the accomplishments that were forever changed many of our lives.
I have worked for an ISP Abuse department and routinely had to enforce DMCA.
You're section of stating you have an authorized right to act on behalf of the rights holder. The DMCA requires that you have looked at the file to determine that it in fact is a copyright to which you own. Thus you are saying you have the right to enforce the copyright in regards to that/file/ since it was your work or a work for which you have the right to enforce copyright action to. The fact is you HAVE to establish that you own the copyrights to the work in that file. Otherwise you mis-represent yourself. As you already said that 512(f) does give people the right to come after you.
Okay so you pull my internet. I refuse to have the MAFIAA state that in order for me to use a private/public network is based on maintaining their making sure their copyrights aren't violated. The end question becomes where do my rights end and theirs begin? In this case the Internet is used for other things that have nothing to do with violating copyrights. Though I guess we could say that in order to sell CD's you maintain a price range that allows all social classes of people easily afford it. I would say 10 cents a song is fair.
They are welcome to knock on the door and request a mandatory security audit. However you need a court order to get in my house if I haven't invited you or you will face my friend Ann Ruger and her associates from L. Ead and Co.
The fact is that anyone that is using a computer yes should secure it but the fact is its too complicated for the typical AOL user. In this case I feel that they need to establish the fact that a person DID something (identify the actual responsible person) before doing something even remotely close to this.
Thanks for your advice. It is truly welcoming and if I am doing something wrong I much rather have someone help me than tear me down.
I have actually been doing the volunteer deal both in a hospital and at some local places teaching computer basics. A lot of people have learned a lot but I doubt it would get me a job. Pay isn't there but it is rewarding to make someone smile.
I will have to try the posting of my resume in my sig. Never thought of it.:)
I live in the United States. The laws, the constitution, the roadway signs, and school is taught in English. With all due respect as long as I live in this great country and when my president and congress people along with every law is written in english I refuse to cater to someone who refuses to learn the language in The US. If I worked in a spanish speaking country I would be excepted to learn the language for them.
It is not right to force me to learn spanish to do business in the US. Maybe I am wrong and I am sure some people out there feel as though I am making myself entitled to not have to learn a foreign language. Which is true I feel that entitlement. But not hiring someone because they will do support / business within the borders of the US and don't speak Spanish is wrong.
Now it is different to say "I need you to learn XX new thing" to which is not learning to talk to another person in the US with a different language I am all for that. I am willing to learn new things.
For all the years I was working I paid a tax to go to the state government insuring that if I lose my job through no fault of my own that I would be able to collect some money until I found a replacement job.
are you getting more out than you paid in? where is that money coming from? someone else is paying for you to not work.
Out of all the years I put into it. I would say probably not. But that is one to debate if I could find how much I paid every year I worked.
The state requires me to make 3 job contacts a week. I do about 5 a day so that's 25 M-F and not counting the about 10 or so I may do on a Saturday and Sunday.
you go in for 35 jobs a week and still don't have one after a year? you're obviously not trying to get a job, but just want collect your free money as long as you can.
I love this one. Personally its the best. You know I did have a 2 offers. One of them was below minimum wage and the way they planned to get around it was it was a "contract". I turned that down. The other offer was for a telemarketing position in which I was paid on commission and there was no way to guarantee I would get paid minimum wage even. Plus I am not a sales person never worked in sales.
So if that means I am trying to get my free money then I guess I am. But given that the economy in the area I am in sucks and given that my area of expertise is in computers which in this city unless you speak both English and Spanish you won't get a job. I don't speak spanish and I refuse to learn to.
There are things that are discussed that are not for the public's ears. There is a reason that (at least in this state) you have to go through a course and be certified before you can be a police officer and have access to some of the systems they have access too. Even 911 dispatchers have to get a certain certification before they can run your license plate / DL.
The phone has nothing to do with that. The phone for its use while on duty or off duty is for business only. Yes calling each officer for information is okay. Because enforcing our law is fine we have a court system that handles that. But telling an officer you have to say it on a radio and no more phone for you is out of the picture. Regardless of PSTN use or recording ability. The discussions taking place on there might not be for the recording to record such as personal information (address, registration information, etc) being discussed with another officer. I get that cell phones may not be as secure but there still is that ability to discuss things that are not needed over a radio.
I never once stuck my head in the sand in saying officers are the best and they make no wrongs. Believe me I know they do. I was recently illegal detained and un-arrested (not legal at all). I went through the same steps every other citizen would go through (regardless of who I knew) that ended up in both officers being fired and losing their peace officer status. I am not saying that police officers won't protect their own (New Orleans is a good example). So let's cut that down now. Let's think of how many police officers are out there doing their job. You hear about officers doing the wrong things. But you also hear about other officers catching them doing the wrong and throwing the wrongs butt in a jail cell. There is a way of handling a wronged time. But far more citizens cry that cops are the worst things because they got a traffic ticket.
How is what they are doing hiding? What about when you are in an accident and they need to notify your family? Do you want it recorded or for others to hear "Mr. and Mrs. Bagger Your Son(or Daughter) was involved in an accident." Would you like that number that he dialed recorded so that someone with a Freedom of Information Act Request can get that call and now have your number? I wouldn't think so.
I don't live in California but I do live in another large state.
I have been unemployed for a year and 5 weeks. I count the weeks not because it is something I enjoy doing but because each week it is another failed week at finding a job to pay for the things that I once used to enjoy. Such as going out to eat 2 times a week. Or the nice house I used to live in. Or buying tires for my car.
The state pays me jack when it comes down to it. The company I worked for years laid me off. For all the years I was working I paid a tax to go to the state government insuring that if I lose my job through no fault of my own that I would be able to collect some money until I found a replacement job. So no the Government isn't a job program but it is in fact there to protect me if I may for the protection.
The state requires me to make 3 job contacts a week. I do about 5 a day so that's 25 M-F and not counting the about 10 or so I may do on a Saturday and Sunday. I don't care if you believe me or not but I don't like having to tell people that I am unemployed when I go into job interviews and they ask me why I haven't worked in the last year. I don't like having to explain to friends that I can't go out and meet them tonight because I don't have the money to pay for drinks or food. I actually don't like the fact that for another Christmas this year all I was able to get someone was a 10.00 Starbucks gift card. So please tell me that the handout I am getting means I am not really trying. Then be lucky you and the GP got a job. Because some of us would love to earn that money and no have to have a taxpayer to fund my paying of bills.
While I may not know the acronyms are for it doesn't change the impact of my statement above.
I have not only worked for LEO's in the past in their IT offices and 911 Centers I also have direct knowledge of what kind of conversations do and have taken place both on the radio and off that radio. I have the knowledge because of not only several rides with the actual police officers but my family has been (Both parents one of which is a retired police officer).
There are times when discussing a situation on the radio to a supervisor is not acceptable because of the questions relating to which charges should be filled or what city ordinances may relate to a certain situation.
These conversations that take place are not always what needs to be going over a radio. Most departments have policies in regards to what channels maybe used for. Some channels are for all people to hear in the field (Fire, Police, EMS) and some are not.
I know for fact that every department going doesn't use APCO-25 (I actually verified at least 3 of the previous departments I worked for and the one my parent works at). So those communications are better held on a cell phone than on the radio.
You loose credibility with me when you make remarks that the police abuse people. While this is the general consensus among those that have some fear of the police it is completely stupid. While there are bad cops out there and cops that sometimes make a bad decision for the most part those cops have families and some of them are really good people. There is no field out there that is perfect and doesn't have bad apples in it. Yup some people get into law enforcement for the power. Some actually do it for the fact they want to keep people safe and make a difference in this world.
It has NOTHING to do with how to make the suspect fall on his face repeatedly. You need to ride along with a police officer. You may be amazed at the level of some work people do. There are things that don't need to be discussed over radio and some of those times they need the radios for other emergencies or possible ones that may come into play. You might be curious to find out the radio use policy of such Law Enforcement Agency has.
I think what a lot of people are missing is what the phones use is for.
I worked for a company in their IT Dept. I handled all the purchasing of new phones and replacement of old ones. Routinely people would ask me to get them a cell phone for "work" related reasons. When I would ask how much are you going to be out of your office per week and the responses was "no that often." Then I wouldn't order it. Costs for cell phones and purchasing some 4800 phones for people that may not need them is excessive. Just because they CAN afford it doesn't mean they SHOULD pay for it.
Another side to this is my friend is a police officer. She is a Asst Supervisor and the city has made it a policy that she and the above her level get cell phones for use by the city. They are to be used for city business only. My mom takes her personal phone to work. Now before she got her phone everyone in their brother would call my mom for help or questions. My mom would reply but only out of respect. It stopped when she got a letter from her supervisor telling her that her review would show that she uses her personal phone a lot. When my mom explained it was city related business not personal she was told to prove it. She provided the bill to the city highlighting all the city related business that came in. When she started using the city phone for everything the chief and the city couldn't believe how much other officers and city officials would call and speak with her or other officers on duty. Before my mom wasn't being paid for her cell phone. Now they see why it is useful.
Another commenter stated that they have radios for that sort of stuff. Sometimes it isn't something you discuss on the radio where someone is asking for information about how to handle a certain charge or whatever. Which is fine the radio waves need to be open for use even though they have several channels they have a use for them.
I agree if the person isn't going to be at their desk like certain police officers or social workers or what have you then we should provide a phone for them. If they spend majority of their time in a desk. Then give the phone back be reasonable and if you have to use your personal phone a few times tough cookies. Remember we went several years without cell phones.
Slashdot Mirror
You make an excellent point here. Very well thought out response. I can see where you are going with the points now. Again very interesting.
This is an interesting point to be made.
Although I am not from the UK nor do I know if this applies but my question would be this. If you are the one making the comment how can you not own the statement? Isn't email seen just as a written letter that one has to answer for if something derogatory or defaming said?
correction... doesn't just state that they can't use the cell phone while driving.
Not to be a jerk here... But the memo doesn't state that they can't use the cell phone apps while driving (that line is at the end). The memo states that those type of apps like Uber are not allowed due to a contractual obligation that they (The commission) has made with payment processors. It also points out that it could also cause problems with the rules for prearranged rides provision in the law.
Sorry I disagree. The dispatcher is NOT law enforcement they have no legal grounds to give you an order to comply. I was involved in a hit and run accident. They went through and I was following the person. They told me to cease following the person. I couldn't get insurance to cover the repairs to my car for 30 days while they "looked" for the person who hit my car. If I get in the same situation I want something done about it.
You asked "WHY"...Contrary to popular belief (sorry Starbucks) money makes the world go round. Not java :-)
I respectfully disagree with your thoughts on this situation and use of the Times Ethics policy.
First off this wasn't a case where the reporter PURPOSELY went in and "tapped" the line, or even they pushed the button to enable the sound to be sent to that room. The fact is what happened is someone some place pushed the wrong button. When they pushed said button and sound was enabled in that room of the conversation then it became public. Though things sometimes are said in meetings because no one thinks you are being heard doesn't make it right. We all should take responsibility for the things we say.
I believe that it was newsworthy. Given what was said and in the response it was aimed at makes the US look bad. There is no need for such disrespect towards other countries officials at all. I am sorry but I do not BELIEVE that anyone person should have the right to deem something newsworthy or not.
I think we all as computer geeks, and various other geeks can all relate to the products and innovation that he helped (either personally or via collective of RnD) put a spin on for the general public. I wish I could have had the pleasure of meeting him one day. He will be extremely missed. It is because of Apple that I even learned to pursue computers to being with. It all started with a Macintosh at a school and ended up spending a life time learning.
To his family, friends, and the rest of the tech community I am sorry for our loss but I am glad for the accomplishments that were forever changed many of our lives.
RIP Mr. Jobs.
I have worked for an ISP Abuse department and routinely had to enforce DMCA.
/file/ since it was your work or a work for which you have the right to enforce copyright action to. The fact is you HAVE to establish that you own the copyrights to the work in that file. Otherwise you mis-represent yourself. As you already said that 512(f) does give people the right to come after you.
You're section of stating you have an authorized right to act on behalf of the rights holder. The DMCA requires that you have looked at the file to determine that it in fact is a copyright to which you own. Thus you are saying you have the right to enforce the copyright in regards to that
Logmein! It's a trojan and someone just hacked my username and password.
Okay so you pull my internet. I refuse to have the MAFIAA state that in order for me to use a private/public network is based on maintaining their making sure their copyrights aren't violated. The end question becomes where do my rights end and theirs begin? In this case the Internet is used for other things that have nothing to do with violating copyrights. Though I guess we could say that in order to sell CD's you maintain a price range that allows all social classes of people easily afford it. I would say 10 cents a song is fair.
With what money?
They are welcome to knock on the door and request a mandatory security audit. However you need a court order to get in my house if I haven't invited you or you will face my friend Ann Ruger and her associates from L. Ead and Co.
The fact is that anyone that is using a computer yes should secure it but the fact is its too complicated for the typical AOL user. In this case I feel that they need to establish the fact that a person DID something (identify the actual responsible person) before doing something even remotely close to this.
Then you will make yourself a pizza because after all that you will be hungry!
I am just as old... I saw that and was like why is a provider in trouble over dots per inch...
The full article states that .com was not sized. :-)
Its not just the Summary... TFA has the same remark of domain names.
Thanks for your advice. It is truly welcoming and if I am doing something wrong I much rather have someone help me than tear me down.
:)
I have actually been doing the volunteer deal both in a hospital and at some local places teaching computer basics. A lot of people have learned a lot but I doubt it would get me a job. Pay isn't there but it is rewarding to make someone smile.
I will have to try the posting of my resume in my sig. Never thought of it.
I live in the United States. The laws, the constitution, the roadway signs, and school is taught in English. With all due respect as long as I live in this great country and when my president and congress people along with every law is written in english I refuse to cater to someone who refuses to learn the language in The US. If I worked in a spanish speaking country I would be excepted to learn the language for them.
It is not right to force me to learn spanish to do business in the US. Maybe I am wrong and I am sure some people out there feel as though I am making myself entitled to not have to learn a foreign language. Which is true I feel that entitlement. But not hiring someone because they will do support / business within the borders of the US and don't speak Spanish is wrong.
Now it is different to say "I need you to learn XX new thing" to which is not learning to talk to another person in the US with a different language I am all for that. I am willing to learn new things.
For all the years I was working I paid a tax to go to the state government insuring that if I lose my job through no fault of my own that I would be able to collect some money until I found a replacement job.
are you getting more out than you paid in? where is that money coming from? someone else is paying for you to not work.
Out of all the years I put into it. I would say probably not. But that is one to debate if I could find how much I paid every year I worked.
The state requires me to make 3 job contacts a week. I do about 5 a day so that's 25 M-F and not counting the about 10 or so I may do on a Saturday and Sunday.
you go in for 35 jobs a week and still don't have one after a year? you're obviously not trying to get a job, but just want collect your free money as long as you can.
I love this one. Personally its the best. You know I did have a 2 offers. One of them was below minimum wage and the way they planned to get around it was it was a "contract". I turned that down. The other offer was for a telemarketing position in which I was paid on commission and there was no way to guarantee I would get paid minimum wage even. Plus I am not a sales person never worked in sales.
So if that means I am trying to get my free money then I guess I am. But given that the economy in the area I am in sucks and given that my area of expertise is in computers which in this city unless you speak both English and Spanish you won't get a job. I don't speak spanish and I refuse to learn to.
There are things that are discussed that are not for the public's ears. There is a reason that (at least in this state) you have to go through a course and be certified before you can be a police officer and have access to some of the systems they have access too. Even 911 dispatchers have to get a certain certification before they can run your license plate / DL.
The phone has nothing to do with that. The phone for its use while on duty or off duty is for business only. Yes calling each officer for information is okay. Because enforcing our law is fine we have a court system that handles that. But telling an officer you have to say it on a radio and no more phone for you is out of the picture. Regardless of PSTN use or recording ability. The discussions taking place on there might not be for the recording to record such as personal information (address, registration information, etc) being discussed with another officer. I get that cell phones may not be as secure but there still is that ability to discuss things that are not needed over a radio.
I never once stuck my head in the sand in saying officers are the best and they make no wrongs. Believe me I know they do. I was recently illegal detained and un-arrested (not legal at all). I went through the same steps every other citizen would go through (regardless of who I knew) that ended up in both officers being fired and losing their peace officer status. I am not saying that police officers won't protect their own (New Orleans is a good example). So let's cut that down now. Let's think of how many police officers are out there doing their job. You hear about officers doing the wrong things. But you also hear about other officers catching them doing the wrong and throwing the wrongs butt in a jail cell. There is a way of handling a wronged time. But far more citizens cry that cops are the worst things because they got a traffic ticket.
How is what they are doing hiding? What about when you are in an accident and they need to notify your family? Do you want it recorded or for others to hear "Mr. and Mrs. Bagger Your Son(or Daughter) was involved in an accident." Would you like that number that he dialed recorded so that someone with a Freedom of Information Act Request can get that call and now have your number? I wouldn't think so.
Really?
I don't live in California but I do live in another large state.
I have been unemployed for a year and 5 weeks. I count the weeks not because it is something I enjoy doing but because each week it is another failed week at finding a job to pay for the things that I once used to enjoy. Such as going out to eat 2 times a week. Or the nice house I used to live in. Or buying tires for my car.
The state pays me jack when it comes down to it. The company I worked for years laid me off. For all the years I was working I paid a tax to go to the state government insuring that if I lose my job through no fault of my own that I would be able to collect some money until I found a replacement job. So no the Government isn't a job program but it is in fact there to protect me if I may for the protection.
The state requires me to make 3 job contacts a week. I do about 5 a day so that's 25 M-F and not counting the about 10 or so I may do on a Saturday and Sunday. I don't care if you believe me or not but I don't like having to tell people that I am unemployed when I go into job interviews and they ask me why I haven't worked in the last year. I don't like having to explain to friends that I can't go out and meet them tonight because I don't have the money to pay for drinks or food. I actually don't like the fact that for another Christmas this year all I was able to get someone was a 10.00 Starbucks gift card. So please tell me that the handout I am getting means I am not really trying. Then be lucky you and the GP got a job. Because some of us would love to earn that money and no have to have a taxpayer to fund my paying of bills.
While I may not know the acronyms are for it doesn't change the impact of my statement above.
I have not only worked for LEO's in the past in their IT offices and 911 Centers I also have direct knowledge of what kind of conversations do and have taken place both on the radio and off that radio. I have the knowledge because of not only several rides with the actual police officers but my family has been (Both parents one of which is a retired police officer).
There are times when discussing a situation on the radio to a supervisor is not acceptable because of the questions relating to which charges should be filled or what city ordinances may relate to a certain situation.
These conversations that take place are not always what needs to be going over a radio. Most departments have policies in regards to what channels maybe used for. Some channels are for all people to hear in the field (Fire, Police, EMS) and some are not.
I know for fact that every department going doesn't use APCO-25 (I actually verified at least 3 of the previous departments I worked for and the one my parent works at). So those communications are better held on a cell phone than on the radio.
You loose credibility with me when you make remarks that the police abuse people. While this is the general consensus among those that have some fear of the police it is completely stupid. While there are bad cops out there and cops that sometimes make a bad decision for the most part those cops have families and some of them are really good people. There is no field out there that is perfect and doesn't have bad apples in it. Yup some people get into law enforcement for the power. Some actually do it for the fact they want to keep people safe and make a difference in this world.
You sir have no clue what you are talking about.
It has NOTHING to do with how to make the suspect fall on his face repeatedly. You need to ride along with a police officer. You may be amazed at the level of some work people do. There are things that don't need to be discussed over radio and some of those times they need the radios for other emergencies or possible ones that may come into play. You might be curious to find out the radio use policy of such Law Enforcement Agency has.
I think what a lot of people are missing is what the phones use is for.
I worked for a company in their IT Dept. I handled all the purchasing of new phones and replacement of old ones. Routinely people would ask me to get them a cell phone for "work" related reasons. When I would ask how much are you going to be out of your office per week and the responses was "no that often." Then I wouldn't order it. Costs for cell phones and purchasing some 4800 phones for people that may not need them is excessive. Just because they CAN afford it doesn't mean they SHOULD pay for it.
Another side to this is my friend is a police officer. She is a Asst Supervisor and the city has made it a policy that she and the above her level get cell phones for use by the city. They are to be used for city business only. My mom takes her personal phone to work. Now before she got her phone everyone in their brother would call my mom for help or questions. My mom would reply but only out of respect. It stopped when she got a letter from her supervisor telling her that her review would show that she uses her personal phone a lot. When my mom explained it was city related business not personal she was told to prove it. She provided the bill to the city highlighting all the city related business that came in. When she started using the city phone for everything the chief and the city couldn't believe how much other officers and city officials would call and speak with her or other officers on duty. Before my mom wasn't being paid for her cell phone. Now they see why it is useful.
Another commenter stated that they have radios for that sort of stuff. Sometimes it isn't something you discuss on the radio where someone is asking for information about how to handle a certain charge or whatever. Which is fine the radio waves need to be open for use even though they have several channels they have a use for them.
I agree if the person isn't going to be at their desk like certain police officers or social workers or what have you then we should provide a phone for them. If they spend majority of their time in a desk. Then give the phone back be reasonable and if you have to use your personal phone a few times tough cookies. Remember we went several years without cell phones.