And here's the same passage translated by google from French to German to English to Italian to English:
Mandrake must for the change of name of Mandrake, is the French publisher of the distribution of Linux of eponyme pouring itself condemned from the TGI from Paris, 70.000? in the societies Hearst Americans to obtain the thing and owner of the king Fearture Syndicate of the indication "Mandrake magicien" and Herausgeberin of the pulled volume of the same name. These the posterior one had transported the claim in France for "the indication exclusion". Especially the court pribisce to the use of the relative name to the French and presses Mandrake that transfers the relati to you names of zone towards the two societies Americans. A judgment, in a position to transporting a mortal blow them to the French publisher, the relative good will on the relative distribution of eponyme is only based. For the l?heure Mandrake it has made the appointment, that it suspends the judgment and that therefore the relative indication maintains and relative to the zone names. Memories to on qu?un that the judgment preceding - that interests the brand - determines for the two societies Americans. The French has already had to still examine the relative copy.
I tried using babelfish to translate the page, and IT DID IT. I'm still in shock. I mean, it was comprehensible, if grammatically atrocious.
Have they improved the translation algorithms? If so, why don't the slashdot editors link to it in the stories anymore? Considering how often they did it I assumed they were getting paid to push babelfish, did that arrangement end?
I think a lot of that comes down to separation of powers; everyone is concerned about placing the legislative and executive branches under judicial authority except as prescribed by the Constitution. Generally the government is protected from civil suit under the doctrine of sovereign immunity, but this usually doesn't apply to acts of government officials conducted outside the scope of their employment. I don't think there are any exemptions to anyone except foreign dignitaries in terms of criminal charges.
This violates due process by imposing a legal penalty on people who have not been convicted of a crime by a court of law.
I still don't see it; a legal penalty does not necessarily equal "life, liberty, or property". You could argue that you're being forced to spend your money to buy one, but I don't see why it would be different than other government mandated things in automobiles.
The Constitution gives Congress the sole power to regulate interstate commerce (Article I, Section 8, Paragraph 3); since New Mexico is not known as a major car-producing area, it seems pretty likely that any purchace of a car is going to involve interstate commerce at some point.
Even if the cars were totally manufactured in NM, the SC would almost certainly consider it interstate commerce. As far back as Wickard v. Filburn (1942) the Court showed itself willing to make almost anything an interstate commerce issue (in Wickard they found that a farmer growing wheat to feed his own livestock was subject to federal agricultural quota regulations).
The SC has (mistakenly, IMHO) ruled that a breath test does not constitute a "search" under the 4th amendment
Do you have a case cite for this?
The Supreme Court has held a very broad interpretation (perhaps over-broad, but that's another issue)
The commerce clause has definitely been stretched past what the founders were thinking, but imho that's a good thing, especially in terms of extending civil rights to the less enlightened states.
So often the case? Do you have any cites beyond the one you put up? I've read a lot of statutes in my day, believe me immunity for government officials (in criminal cases at least) is very, very rare.
What would you consider to be fair compensation then? Lawyers in class action suits generally don't get the same percentage that lawyers in regular civil suits get. You can find information on the subject
here.
The lawyers are suing IBM. They are paying all the costs. The "class" is made up of losers who lend their names by affirming they bought a "defective drive."
So? Class action suits take a lot of time and effort, why shouldn't they get paid for their work?
If you feel you have been wronged by because your 1,000,000 hour MTBF drive will only last 900,000 hours, simply tell 10 of your friends and don't buy any IBM stuff.
Inefficient, useless, and kind of dumb. First of all if my friend tells me that he had a problem with a piece of hardware, I'm not going to assume that manufacturer makes generally shoddy merchandise. I'll just assume he got a bad drive.
Secondly, it doesn't fix my problem, namely that I spent money on a drive that didn't perform as it was supposed to. IBM breached a warranty, they should compensate me for the money I spent buying the drive in the first place.
Alright, I want you to post more sentries. And tell the men their wine ration is halved. Tell the centurions any discipline problems are to be dealt with harshly!
Everything ISN'T covered by insurance. And without punitive damages you get situations like Ford's Pinto, where the company knew the car was defective, found that it would take $11 to fix this flaw, but calculated that it was cheaper to just let people die and then pay damages. Without punitive damages companies can do this all the time.
Unfortunately, most court disputes between hi-tech companies finish long after the technologies in question are dead. Just look at Lineo/Canopy : when they won the DRDOS settlement against Microsoft, Windows 95 and DOS were already just a painful reminder of the past.
At least they got (if rumors are to be believed) an enormous cash award.
Of course, this will get modded down because libertarian or conservative views get an automatic -1 (Not Liberal) here most of the time;)
Are you on crack? Slashdot is overwhelmingly libertarian. You'd have to be on day three of an alcohol-assisted LSD trip to even ENTERTAIN the idea that it's otherwise.
Slashdot Mirror
Mmm, hot fun.
Newsgroups have helped me solve most of the problems I have at work
Usenet: the cause of, and solution to, all work-related problems...
And here's the same passage translated by google from French to German to English to Italian to English:
Mandrake must for the change of name of Mandrake, is the French publisher of the distribution of Linux of eponyme pouring itself condemned from the TGI from Paris, 70.000? in the societies Hearst Americans to obtain the thing and owner of the king Fearture Syndicate of the indication "Mandrake magicien" and Herausgeberin of the pulled volume of the same name. These the posterior one had transported the claim in France for "the indication exclusion". Especially the court pribisce to the use of the relative name to the French and presses Mandrake that transfers the relati to you names of zone towards the two societies Americans. A judgment, in a position to transporting a mortal blow them to the French publisher, the relative good will on the relative distribution of eponyme is only based. For the l?heure Mandrake it has made the appointment, that it suspends the judgment and that therefore the relative indication maintains and relative to the zone names. Memories to on qu?un that the judgment preceding - that interests the brand - determines for the two societies Americans. The French has already had to still examine the relative copy.
I tried using babelfish to translate the page, and IT DID IT. I'm still in shock. I mean, it was comprehensible, if grammatically atrocious.
Have they improved the translation algorithms? If so, why don't the slashdot editors link to it in the stories anymore? Considering how often they did it I assumed they were getting paid to push babelfish, did that arrangement end?
I think a lot of that comes down to separation of powers; everyone is concerned about placing the legislative and executive branches under judicial authority except as prescribed by the Constitution. Generally the government is protected from civil suit under the doctrine of sovereign immunity, but this usually doesn't apply to acts of government officials conducted outside the scope of their employment. I don't think there are any exemptions to anyone except foreign dignitaries in terms of criminal charges.
This violates due process by imposing a legal penalty on people who have not been convicted of a crime by a court of law.
I still don't see it; a legal penalty does not necessarily equal "life, liberty, or property". You could argue that you're being forced to spend your money to buy one, but I don't see why it would be different than other government mandated things in automobiles.
The Constitution gives Congress the sole power to regulate interstate commerce (Article I, Section 8, Paragraph 3); since New Mexico is not known as a major car-producing area, it seems pretty likely that any purchace of a car is going to involve interstate commerce at some point.
Even if the cars were totally manufactured in NM, the SC would almost certainly consider it interstate commerce. As far back as Wickard v. Filburn (1942) the Court showed itself willing to make almost anything an interstate commerce issue (in Wickard they found that a farmer growing wheat to feed his own livestock was subject to federal agricultural quota regulations).
The SC has (mistakenly, IMHO) ruled that a breath test does not constitute a "search" under the 4th amendment
Do you have a case cite for this?
The Supreme Court has held a very broad interpretation (perhaps over-broad, but that's another issue)
The commerce clause has definitely been stretched past what the founders were thinking, but imho that's a good thing, especially in terms of extending civil rights to the less enlightened states.
The right wing of the Republican party tends to be government by and for the oafs.
Oh please, if you don't see any difference between them then it's pointless to try to explain it to you...
was my final year project for my masters degree at the Department of Computing, Imperial College
Bah, those are the same people who designed the Death Star. Won't Y have the same design flaws?
Yeah, my Jack Daniels brand mouthwash has a little alcohol too.
How exactly does this violate the 5th amendment? MAYBE you could argue it qualifies as testifying against himself, but that would a be a real stretch.
So often the case? Do you have any cites beyond the one you put up? I've read a lot of statutes in my day, believe me immunity for government officials (in criminal cases at least) is very, very rare.
Didn't they have one of those jobbies in Voltron? If it's good enough for Voltron it's damn good enough for ME, let me tell you...
That doesn't sound like a bad life actually...
I RMA'd them - drive 1 was RMA'd a total of 6 times; drive 2, 7 times.
There's your problem, stop RMAing (whatever that is) them and maybe they won't break so much. You have to treat them gently.
What would you consider to be fair compensation then? Lawyers in class action suits generally don't get the same percentage that lawyers in regular civil suits get. You can find information on the subject here.
And chicks dig guys wearing anti-static wrist straps!
There's a lightbulb in California that's been on since 1901.
The lawyers are suing IBM. They are paying all the costs. The "class" is made up of losers who lend their names by affirming they bought a "defective drive."
So? Class action suits take a lot of time and effort, why shouldn't they get paid for their work?
If you feel you have been wronged by because your 1,000,000 hour MTBF drive will only last 900,000 hours, simply tell 10 of your friends and don't buy any IBM stuff.
Inefficient, useless, and kind of dumb. First of all if my friend tells me that he had a problem with a piece of hardware, I'm not going to assume that manufacturer makes generally shoddy merchandise. I'll just assume he got a bad drive.
Secondly, it doesn't fix my problem, namely that I spent money on a drive that didn't perform as it was supposed to. IBM breached a warranty, they should compensate me for the money I spent buying the drive in the first place.
They want dissension in the open source camp.
Alright, I want you to post more sentries. And tell the men their wine ration is halved. Tell the centurions any discipline problems are to be dealt with harshly!
Oh, you're a libertarian...
Everything ISN'T covered by insurance. And without punitive damages you get situations like Ford's Pinto, where the company knew the car was defective, found that it would take $11 to fix this flaw, but calculated that it was cheaper to just let people die and then pay damages. Without punitive damages companies can do this all the time.
Unfortunately, most court disputes between hi-tech companies finish long after the technologies in question are dead. Just look at Lineo/Canopy : when they won the DRDOS settlement against Microsoft, Windows 95 and DOS were already just a painful reminder of the past.
At least they got (if rumors are to be believed) an enormous cash award.
Hey, I only subscribe to The Moon Landing Times...
Of course, this will get modded down because libertarian or conservative views get an automatic -1 (Not Liberal) here most of the time ;)
Are you on crack? Slashdot is overwhelmingly libertarian. You'd have to be on day three of an alcohol-assisted LSD trip to even ENTERTAIN the idea that it's otherwise.