Or if it is an HTC. So throw out another 50% of devices out there.
I'm on a HTC Hero... rooted, and running aospCMod (AOSP 2.3.4 / CM7+ (Gingerbread)).
I don't have a Sixaxis to test the actual hardware, but the compatibility checker indicates that my phone is compatible.
So maybe not completely "throw out another 50% of devices out there." Mod'ed HTC's may be good to go, and a mod'ded phone is guaranteed to be rooted.
but that 'contract' the end user agrees to does not trump law. so there may be valid loop-holes and precedents.
Well, certainly a contract to do something illegal is not a valid contract, and form contracts of adhesion that do not allow negotiation (the kind nearly everyone signs with their ISP) are looked at with increased scrutiny and some disfavor by courts.
But the law largely allows you to freedom to bind yourself to contracts and those contracts are enforced, by law.
im not a lawyer or a criminal, so I havent got any references,
Though our laws at the local, state, and federal levels are becoming increasingly complex, you do not need to be a lawyer, (or a criminal!) to be educated on the rules governing our society's behavior.
200 years ago, people could buy cannons, though. And they did. Privately owned cannons were the majority of the artillery fielded by the fledgling navy and continental navy, so I really fail to see why howitzers should be a problem today.
The main thing keeping people from buying howitzers is the same thing keeping people from buying cannons 200 years ago: A giant milled tube of steel isn't exactly inexpensive to manufacture, and then you have to find a place to keep it.
Antonin Scalia (current Supreme Court Justice) came to visit Harvard Law a couple years back. After the end of his talk he accepted questions, which ranged from the intelligent to the inane.
My favorite part:
One kid, who may or may not have been affiliated with Harvard (looked like an MIT student to me), claimed that he had visited a military contractor and attempted to buy a missile launcher. But (for some strange reason) the contractor declined to make the sale. The kid asked Scalia what had happened to the right to bear arms.
Scalia proceeded to tear into the kid, opening with the line: "First of all, you can't bear a cannon..."
Also check out footnote 18:
The court seems to find no difference between torrent files and the files they point to:
The fact that the dot-torrent files automatically cause content files to be downloaded and assembled (see also supra Part II.A) rebuts Defendants’ assertions that users’ act of downloading dot- torrent files does not constitute actual copyright infringement. It may be true that the act of downloading a dot-torrent file is not itself a copyright-infringing action; but once that dot-torrent file triggers the process of downloading a content file, copyright infringement has taken place. Because dot-torrent files automatically trigger this content-downloading process, it is clear that dot-torrent files and content files are, for all practical purposes, synonymous. To conclude otherwise would be to elevate form over substance.
For a long time, the wikipedia article on the Knuth-Morris-Pratt algorithm seemed to show the shift table for the Morris-Pratt algorithm instead. Encountered this years ago as a cs major... it definitely wasn't fixed in a week and might still be there...
Neither of these stories had any examples of people who were truly innocent but forced to plead guilty. Prisons are full of people who say they are innocent, yet the vast majority of them are in fact guilty. I'm not saying no innocent person has ever been coerced into pleading to something they didn't do, but there was no evidence of it in your examples.
Here are some examples, 51 of them to be exact:
In 51 of the 328 exonerations since 1989 – 15% – the defendants confessed to crimes they had not committed. In most of these cases it is apparent that the false confessions were coerced by the police.42
And to everyone in the U.S. who has heard of the Canadian Copyright Levy but thought it could never happen here:
U.S.C. 17 Â 1004 puts a 3% levy (private tax) on all recorders and recording media used to record digital audio.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/usc_sup_01_17_10_10.html. The proceeds of which are split up and divided among artists and labels.
The statute actually targets manufacturers/importers but there's a neat trick called passing the cost on to the consumer.
If I wrote a text, then I'm the author of that text. I can't really "waive" that. No statement from my side can change the FACT that I'm the author.
Laws designed to protect artist rights in several countries (see VARA in the U.S.) do allow one to disclaim authorship. One rationale is that if a piece of artwork is defaced or changed, the author may not want to be associated with it. While calling texts art might be a stretch, it's easy to analogize.
Interestingly, Lawrence Lessig returns to Harvard Law just a few weeks before Harvard Law dean Elena Kagan is nominated for Solicitor General. How many more will Obama take into his administration?
I second the Spain recommendation. I studied at Universitat PolitÃcnica de Catalunya (http://www.upc.es/) in 05 and had an amazing time. Barcelona has much to offer in terms of history, architecture, and culture. It took a week or so to get over the then current fashion trend--mullets on women--but hey, different user interface, same great kernel.
Slashdot Mirror
Or if it is an HTC. So throw out another 50% of devices out there.
I'm on a HTC Hero... rooted, and running aospCMod (AOSP 2.3.4 / CM7+ (Gingerbread)). I don't have a Sixaxis to test the actual hardware, but the compatibility checker indicates that my phone is compatible.
So maybe not completely "throw out another 50% of devices out there." Mod'ed HTC's may be good to go, and a mod'ded phone is guaranteed to be rooted.
as if you needed to be a lawyer to arbitrate anyway
but that 'contract' the end user agrees to does not trump law. so there may be valid loop-holes and precedents.
Well, certainly a contract to do something illegal is not a valid contract, and form contracts of adhesion that do not allow negotiation (the kind nearly everyone signs with their ISP) are looked at with increased scrutiny and some disfavor by courts.
But the law largely allows you to freedom to bind yourself to contracts and those contracts are enforced, by law.
im not a lawyer or a criminal, so I havent got any references,
Though our laws at the local, state, and federal levels are becoming increasingly complex, you do not need to be a lawyer, (or a criminal!) to be educated on the rules governing our society's behavior.
[T]hat's why I've shorted Apple stock. Frankly, I suggest you all do likewise.
How to get rich of Apple and other stocks:
Step 1. Give dubious investment advice on Slashdot.
Step 2. Take a market position counter to your own advice.
Step 3. ??
Step 4. Profit!!!
200 years ago, people could buy cannons, though. And they did. Privately owned cannons were the majority of the artillery fielded by the fledgling navy and continental navy, so I really fail to see why howitzers should be a problem today.
The main thing keeping people from buying howitzers is the same thing keeping people from buying cannons 200 years ago: A giant milled tube of steel isn't exactly inexpensive to manufacture, and then you have to find a place to keep it.
Antonin Scalia (current Supreme Court Justice) came to visit Harvard Law a couple years back. After the end of his talk he accepted questions, which ranged from the intelligent to the inane. My favorite part: One kid, who may or may not have been affiliated with Harvard (looked like an MIT student to me), claimed that he had visited a military contractor and attempted to buy a missile launcher. But (for some strange reason) the contractor declined to make the sale. The kid asked Scalia what had happened to the right to bear arms. Scalia proceeded to tear into the kid, opening with the line: "First of all, you can't bear a cannon..."
The fact that the dot-torrent files automatically cause content files to be downloaded and assembled (see also supra Part II.A) rebuts Defendants’ assertions that users’ act of downloading dot- torrent files does not constitute actual copyright infringement. It may be true that the act of downloading a dot-torrent file is not itself a copyright-infringing action; but once that dot-torrent file triggers the process of downloading a content file, copyright infringement has taken place. Because dot-torrent files automatically trigger this content-downloading process, it is clear that dot-torrent files and content files are, for all practical purposes, synonymous. To conclude otherwise would be to elevate form over substance.
Descriptions of the tables can be found here:
MP KMP
How about an unlocked Nook?
Neither of these stories had any examples of people who were truly innocent but forced to plead guilty. Prisons are full of people who say they are innocent, yet the vast majority of them are in fact guilty. I'm not saying no innocent person has ever been coerced into pleading to something they didn't do, but there was no evidence of it in your examples.
Here are some examples, 51 of them to be exact:
In 51 of the 328 exonerations since 1989 – 15% – the defendants confessed to crimes they had not committed. In most of these cases it is apparent that the false confessions were coerced by the police.42
Samuel R. Gross, et al. Exonerations In The United States 1989 Through 2003 http://www.mindfully.org/Reform/2004/Prison-Exonerations-Gross19apr04.htm
Keep in mind these are only the false confessions that were caught between 1989 and 2003.
I can wait for a [car] robber to take the car.
Car robbers? Do you mean car thieves? I guess bank robbers have been doing it wrong all these years. They need to take the entire bank, not the money!
And to everyone in the U.S. who has heard of the Canadian Copyright Levy but thought it could never happen here: U.S.C. 17 Â 1004 puts a 3% levy (private tax) on all recorders and recording media used to record digital audio. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/usc_sup_01_17_10_10.html. The proceeds of which are split up and divided among artists and labels. The statute actually targets manufacturers/importers but there's a neat trick called passing the cost on to the consumer.
Some people work around bad smells, they learn to live with it.
Some people work around flashing light patterns. Others get epileptic seizures from electric rodents: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denn%C5%8D_Senshi_Porygon
If I wrote a text, then I'm the author of that text. I can't really "waive" that. No statement from my side can change the FACT that I'm the author.
Laws designed to protect artist rights in several countries (see VARA in the U.S.) do allow one to disclaim authorship. One rationale is that if a piece of artwork is defaced or changed, the author may not want to be associated with it. While calling texts art might be a stretch, it's easy to analogize.
Mine was the first to hit 33% girls :)
Interestingly, Lawrence Lessig returns to Harvard Law just a few weeks before Harvard Law dean Elena Kagan is nominated for Solicitor General. How many more will Obama take into his administration?
I second the Spain recommendation. I studied at Universitat PolitÃcnica de Catalunya (http://www.upc.es/) in 05 and had an amazing time. Barcelona has much to offer in terms of history, architecture, and culture. It took a week or so to get over the then current fashion trend--mullets on women--but hey, different user interface, same great kernel.
If /. wants to pontificate about censorship they should do it in the cause of a more upright citizen.
Rodney King wasn't exactly a model citizen but that doesn't make discussion any less meritorious.