Damn, you're right. Never heard of that law. I'm guessing the local music stores don't actually buy CDs on their own, but rather get them from used CD wholesalers in the case of indie stores, and from chain-wide distribution centers in the case of the chains. I'm also guessing very few people actually follow this law.
Except in Florida and Utah, where it is apparently extremely difficult to sell a used CD. It's not quite illegal, but stores are apparently required to fingerprint all CD sellers, and maintain records for 3 years.
That definitely sounds like a hoax. I'm in Florida and the local music stores have a wide selection of used CDs, and I've never seen them fingerprint anyone.
I'm still quite the socialist*, but my view of the constitution is originalist. Many federal programs that I think are just fine are, unfortunately, not constitutional. The states should be running these programs as they see fit, not the feds.
In terms of programs that provide services, the legislature has a broad power to "lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States.
I think this covers most governmental spending programs at the federal level. In terms of enacting laws to prohibit and regulate certain behavior, while I would agree Congress and the Supreme Court have pushed the commerce clause past reason, I think ultimately it was necessary. If it comes up to upholding the Constitution, and stopping people from getting lynched because of the color of their skin, I think the latter is more important.
In terms of civil rights, the government is explicitly granted the power to enforce them by the 14th Amendment.
Definitely. It took me a few months after law school to get a job, and I sort of lucked into it; I know people who are still unemployed after more than a year. And the debt...oh my, the debt. I'm so in debt it's funny.
would consider a less than B average in high school as "model student" material. from tfa [quote] Cohen said her client has "no disciplinary record at school, and he is the model student" with a 2.97 grade-point average.
You should see the curve in law school, it's brutal. A 2.97 in most law schools is actually good.
You really think the Wii was MADE to last for 8-12 years, like the 360 and PS3? By the time Sony is financially able to justify a PS4, we'll be on Nintendo's 3rd console of the generation... guess who'll have the huge graphic-to-price advantage, then?
Hell yes it was made to last that long. Nintendo is notorious for trying to spin its consoles as not requiring an upgrade for a very long while. Nintendo longs for the days of the NES and Game Boy, where they could just sit back and collect the licensing fees without having to spend money on R&D. It hasn't worked out for them, and one of the reasons their last two consoles before the Wii had mediocre sales performance was because they insist on staying a step behind graphically, and think they can make up for it by being "fun". They succeeded this generation, but they'll inevitably mess it up down the road (not slamming Nintendo specifically here, nobody can bat 1000).
And before people start whining about me being some sort of PS3 fanboy, I do not own a PS3 and can't see myself owning one anytime soon. Hell, I never even got a PS2. I'm just a gamer with a long memory who remembers the things Nintendo tried to pull.
O.k, how about: can republishing *previously publicly available* information be construed as a negligent or malicious act?
Let's say you do some digging, and find X ratted out his dealer. Let's say that while this fact was somewhere in a public record, it took some digging and the dealer never found this out. You call up the dealer, and tell them X ratted him out. The dealer kills X.
Under the law, it's possible you could be convicted and/or successfully sued for doing this.
My point is individual acts that aren't illegal in themselves can be if taken collectively. If you take an action which you know or should know poses a serious threat of bodily harm to another person, and it is the proximate cause of such harm, you may be liable. What's so hard to understand about that?
If this site does in fact gather all its information from documents that are in the public domain (as it claims), then there's not much in the way of recourse.
Well individual acts may be legal, but still expose you to criminal and civil liability if you carry them out. It's not illegal for me to tell my friend that he can use my car any time he wants without asking, and it's not illegal for me to cut the brake lines on that car; but if I don't inform my friend that driving it might not be a good idea, and he subsequently drives off a cliff, that's probably murder on the criminal side, and wrongful death on the civil side.
admitting in the brief write-up that there isn't any science behind this?
Maybe they read the article, which points out various scientists who argue that there IS evidence about it.
I've got to say, the ridiculously emotional backlash I see on/. against ANY suggestion that wifi or cell phone signals MAY cause some adverse health effects is sloppy, anti-science thinking.
I personally don't believe cell phone signals or wifi signals are strong enough to cause health problems. But I'm certainly not going to be arrogant enough to proclaim that there absolutely are no health problems and we shouldn't even look at the problem.
I thought/. != FUD.
Please, half of/. is FUD./. is only anti-FUD in regards to its pet causes.
It may be true that Microsoft can run any individual open source company into the ground, but if every company that uses linux were to contribute to the legal fund it would be a real fight.
You don't even need that. You can steamroll over smaller parties with an expensive legal team, but after a certain amount of money the sides are basically equal, because at that point you've already hired all the lawyers and support staff you're going to need. Red Hat, for example, could afford as good a legal team as MS.
This isn't a product of the corporate world. However, in this case the OLPC people seem ideologically opposed to providing the laptops outside of the 3rd world children market they're aiming at.
I'd guess most places it's the same. But people with sloppy logical reasoning skills have more fun just making vague complaints about "political correctness" without actually informing themselves as to the law.
Of course, they're sooo with it. Like when they gave "Jethro Tull" a Grammy for "Best Heavy Metal Album" or something like that.
That was great, for the simple reason that it really annoyed Metallica fans, who tended to be annoying.
Also, Jethro Tull kicks ass. It's not like they gave a grammy to one of those fake heavy-metal-wannabe hair bands or something. And the relevant album really kind of was heavy metal, if their whole body of work isn't.
"Just words"? Language is the core of human culture. Language affects emotion, if it didn't literature, poetry, song--these things would be pretty much pointless. If language can create positive emotions, why is it so hard to believe it can create negative ones?
Plus I love the English language. If you have to put profanity in every sentence, you're doing a lousy job of speaking it, and that annoys me. It's like watching someone drive a ferrari without knowing how to shift; it makes me wince.
Slashdot Mirror
Damn, you're right. Never heard of that law. I'm guessing the local music stores don't actually buy CDs on their own, but rather get them from used CD wholesalers in the case of indie stores, and from chain-wide distribution centers in the case of the chains. I'm also guessing very few people actually follow this law.
Except in Florida and Utah, where it is apparently extremely difficult to sell a used CD. It's not quite illegal, but stores are apparently required to fingerprint all CD sellers, and maintain records for 3 years.
That definitely sounds like a hoax. I'm in Florida and the local music stores have a wide selection of used CDs, and I've never seen them fingerprint anyone.
I know on Slashdot it is cool to hate what is popular (unless it is Apple for some reason)
Or Nintendo, or Google. Though Google is starting to get flack these days...
Wow, I don't think I've ever seen a story on slashdot I cared so little about.
Don't mod me down; I had a very good reason for clicking on this story. I wanted to write the above snide comment.
Again, its debatable. I am not black and didn't live in the south before 1965.
Neither am I. What does that have to do with it?
I'm still quite the socialist*, but my view of the constitution is originalist. Many federal programs that I think are just fine are, unfortunately, not constitutional. The states should be running these programs as they see fit, not the feds.
In terms of programs that provide services, the legislature has a broad power to "lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States.
I think this covers most governmental spending programs at the federal level. In terms of enacting laws to prohibit and regulate certain behavior, while I would agree Congress and the Supreme Court have pushed the commerce clause past reason, I think ultimately it was necessary. If it comes up to upholding the Constitution, and stopping people from getting lynched because of the color of their skin, I think the latter is more important.
In terms of civil rights, the government is explicitly granted the power to enforce them by the 14th Amendment.
And the view is a lot better.
Definitely. It took me a few months after law school to get a job, and I sort of lucked into it; I know people who are still unemployed after more than a year. And the debt...oh my, the debt. I'm so in debt it's funny.
No wonder you go by the moniker sheep...Teachers have to earn respect just like everyone else.
Please, high school kids are lousy judges of character and have no clue when it comes to judging whether someone is deserving of respect or not.
would consider a less than B average in high school as "model student" material. from tfa [quote] Cohen said her client has "no disciplinary record at school, and he is the model student" with a 2.97 grade-point average.
You should see the curve in law school, it's brutal. A 2.97 in most law schools is actually good.
From the article:
the cheery, 35-year-old artist and Rutgers professor, whose bleached-blond hair complements his fluorescent-green pants.
If he's going out of his way to look like the quintessential terrorist, the FBI should have investigated.
You really think the Wii was MADE to last for 8-12 years, like the 360 and PS3? By the time Sony is financially able to justify a PS4, we'll be on Nintendo's 3rd console of the generation... guess who'll have the huge graphic-to-price advantage, then?
Hell yes it was made to last that long. Nintendo is notorious for trying to spin its consoles as not requiring an upgrade for a very long while. Nintendo longs for the days of the NES and Game Boy, where they could just sit back and collect the licensing fees without having to spend money on R&D. It hasn't worked out for them, and one of the reasons their last two consoles before the Wii had mediocre sales performance was because they insist on staying a step behind graphically, and think they can make up for it by being "fun". They succeeded this generation, but they'll inevitably mess it up down the road (not slamming Nintendo specifically here, nobody can bat 1000).
And before people start whining about me being some sort of PS3 fanboy, I do not own a PS3 and can't see myself owning one anytime soon. Hell, I never even got a PS2. I'm just a gamer with a long memory who remembers the things Nintendo tried to pull.
Or buy the dual format player. Which is a tad pricey now but should go down in a few years.
O.k, how about: can republishing *previously publicly available* information be construed as a negligent or malicious act?
Let's say you do some digging, and find X ratted out his dealer. Let's say that while this fact was somewhere in a public record, it took some digging and the dealer never found this out. You call up the dealer, and tell them X ratted him out. The dealer kills X.
Under the law, it's possible you could be convicted and/or successfully sued for doing this.
My point is individual acts that aren't illegal in themselves can be if taken collectively. If you take an action which you know or should know poses a serious threat of bodily harm to another person, and it is the proximate cause of such harm, you may be liable. What's so hard to understand about that?
My suggestion is, if you MUST, just do drugs, don't sell them.
...or possess them in quantities sufficient for the law to presume you intended to sell them.
If this site does in fact gather all its information from documents that are in the public domain (as it claims), then there's not much in the way of recourse.
Well individual acts may be legal, but still expose you to criminal and civil liability if you carry them out. It's not illegal for me to tell my friend that he can use my car any time he wants without asking, and it's not illegal for me to cut the brake lines on that car; but if I don't inform my friend that driving it might not be a good idea, and he subsequently drives off a cliff, that's probably murder on the criminal side, and wrongful death on the civil side.
1940's: hysteria about radiation from nuclear weapons
You...don't think fallout from nuclear weapons would be a bit harmful to your health? That's an interesting position to take.
admitting in the brief write-up that there isn't any science behind this?
/. against ANY suggestion that wifi or cell phone signals MAY cause some adverse health effects is sloppy, anti-science thinking.
/. != FUD.
/. is FUD. /. is only anti-FUD in regards to its pet causes.
Maybe they read the article, which points out various scientists who argue that there IS evidence about it.
I've got to say, the ridiculously emotional backlash I see on
I personally don't believe cell phone signals or wifi signals are strong enough to cause health problems. But I'm certainly not going to be arrogant enough to proclaim that there absolutely are no health problems and we shouldn't even look at the problem.
I thought
Please, half of
It may be true that Microsoft can run any individual open source company into the ground, but if every company that uses linux were to contribute to the legal fund it would be a real fight.
You don't even need that. You can steamroll over smaller parties with an expensive legal team, but after a certain amount of money the sides are basically equal, because at that point you've already hired all the lawyers and support staff you're going to need. Red Hat, for example, could afford as good a legal team as MS.
This isn't a product of the corporate world. However, in this case the OLPC people seem ideologically opposed to providing the laptops outside of the 3rd world children market they're aiming at.
I don't know where you are, but in Texas ..
I'd guess most places it's the same. But people with sloppy logical reasoning skills have more fun just making vague complaints about "political correctness" without actually informing themselves as to the law.
Of course, they're sooo with it. Like when they gave "Jethro Tull" a Grammy for "Best Heavy Metal Album" or something like that.
That was great, for the simple reason that it really annoyed Metallica fans, who tended to be annoying.
Also, Jethro Tull kicks ass. It's not like they gave a grammy to one of those fake heavy-metal-wannabe hair bands or something. And the relevant album really kind of was heavy metal, if their whole body of work isn't.
"Just words"? Language is the core of human culture. Language affects emotion, if it didn't literature, poetry, song--these things would be pretty much pointless. If language can create positive emotions, why is it so hard to believe it can create negative ones?
Plus I love the English language. If you have to put profanity in every sentence, you're doing a lousy job of speaking it, and that annoys me. It's like watching someone drive a ferrari without knowing how to shift; it makes me wince.
Yeah, what a bunch of pansie ass girly-men, those kinds of yahoo's are what destroying my Military. Real men edit documents with vi or emacs
Yep, when I think manly men I think UNIX coders.