They claimed that tobacco was not dangerous. Then when the warning labels had to be put on the package, they claimed, "The government made us do it, but there is no real proof to the danger. And of course it's not addictive"
But all the time they hid the proof that they did have.
ANd you obviously don't know the basis of the gun suit.
What about holding a virus writer liable for the virus that he/she writes? Do you feel that makers of SPAMming software that hijacks unauthorized computers to SPAM to be held liable?
Napter is different. They don't claim pirates can't use it. Nobody dies when Napster is properly used.
Does this apply to content being sent into Australia? If so, will anyone providing streaming video/audio be required to block any IP from Australia?
Will they be setting up a block on any streaming media arriving in Austrailia? Maybe they will require ISPs to block every unlicensed stream? What about buddyphone?
Anyone want a free trip or Australia? Just send some streaming media there, and they'll haul you off to Australia for a trial.
This is not the government banning the user from the eBay. This is eBay asking that the government (a federal judge as an agent of the government) to assist them in banning this person from the store.
This would be the same as a person being banned from a movie theater. That the manager caught the person bring in a flashlight on the screen during the movie. They tell the person to leave.
Then this person puts on a wig and come again.
Then the call the police and have the person arrested for tresspassing after the 4th time.
Given the nature of the web, it's easy to create a new personna and come in with a new disguise.
They not only give free software, but free food too.
I spoke to someone who wrote a review of some compilers for a magazine. I read the review long before speaking with him. He told me that the magazine changed the numbers on the score card. The review in the text did not match the numbers on the score card.
At SD94, Gene Wang was presenting to a very nice breakfast for the press people. One woman refered to a press badge as a beer badge.
This type of thing have gone on for quite a while. That is sometimes why you see a review that looks like a rehash of a press release and wonder, if the reviewer actually used it.
I read through the text of the house hearings. The hearing list includes people from Oregon Racing Commission and the National Indian Gaming Commission.
Maybe I am too suspicious of the people in Washington. Wasn't the movie "Distinguished Gentlemen" a documentary?
And the Credit card company didn't get the money back from the casino?
I suspect that they did. When my credit card number was stolen, the credit card company didn't care. They charged it back to the merchant. The merchant didn't press charges because it was not worth it to them.
Since Casinos are backing this, it's not just an issue of state sanctioned v. non-sanctioned. But it could be taxes not being collected on winnings or profit.
What about blocking commercials on cruise ships? How about outlawing any movie with gambling?
There is a simpler solution that is already being implemented. Don't require payment of gambling debts on credit cards. There has been a couple of court cases where the credit card charges for these on-line gambling sites been reversed. If they can't get paid for people who lose money on their sites, they will have an incentive to ontrol themselves.
I have a real problem when the government or corporation dictates what I can or cannot read.
Why not ban all advertising on cruise ships that have gabling?
There is a simpler solution that is already being implemented. Don't require payment of gambling debts on credit cards. There has been a couple of court cases where the charges for these on-line gambling sites been reversed. If they can't get paid for people who lose money on their sites, they will have an incentive to control themselfs.
Maybe that is why Microsoft is insisting that companies does not include a seperate Windows CD and just use the "recovery" CD to reinstall the WinBlows Image.
BTW: I always hated the CDs that don't allow you to install the products without wiping the entire system.
Encrypting something is different from having the police kick down the door, for telling people how poor it is and proving it.
I use encryption, sometimes.
But there is a difference in using encryption and using encryption to prevent someone from exercising their fair use rights (DECSS). Or using encryption, then litigation, to prevent people from talking about screwed up products (CPHack).
Maybe one day, people will understand the issues. Most people take the attitude, "if you weren't doing anything wrong, you would not have a problem." If you don't libel a company, they won't bother you. If you are not a hacker, then they won't kick down your door.
Most people don't realize things effect them until, they are dragged off to the concentration camps.
Slashdot Mirror
You know, you drink to much coffee when...
There is no cost to it, but it does take 3-5 days to transfer money in your paypals account to your linked bank account.
I'm not complaining, but are trying to use the float to make money. I'm not blaming them, I'd do the same myself.
Remember for years, they denied any any harmful effect from using cell phones.
They claimed that tobacco was not dangerous. Then when the warning labels had to be put on the package, they claimed, "The government made us do it, but there is no real proof to the danger. And of course it's not addictive"
But all the time they hid the proof that they did have.
ANd you obviously don't know the basis of the gun suit.
What about holding a virus writer liable for the virus that he/she writes? Do you feel that makers of SPAMming software that hijacks unauthorized computers to SPAM to be held liable?
Napter is different. They don't claim pirates can't use it. Nobody dies when Napster is properly used.
The response from Wolverine to Cyclops was cute."How do we know it's really you", response, "You're still a dick.".
I don't think Wolverine said "bub" in the movie once.
What happens when lightening hits a toad?
It's not like they are flying the reviewers to Redmond to help in writing a review.
This happens in the movie and book reviews too.
Even so, giving out a few $20 CD should not really influence someone's opinion much.
Would you believe a review that did not have any anything bad to say about a software package?
Will they be setting up a block on any streaming media arriving in Austrailia? Maybe they will require ISPs to block every unlicensed stream? What about buddyphone?
Anyone want a free trip or Australia? Just send some streaming media there, and they'll haul you off to Australia for a trial.
This would be the same as a person being banned from a movie theater. That the manager caught the person bring in a flashlight on the screen during the movie. They tell the person to leave.
Then this person puts on a wig and come again.
Then the call the police and have the person arrested for tresspassing after the 4th time.
Given the nature of the web, it's easy to create a new personna and come in with a new disguise.
I spoke to someone who wrote a review of some compilers for a magazine. I read the review long before speaking with him. He told me that the magazine changed the numbers on the score card. The review in the text did not match the numbers on the score card.
At SD94, Gene Wang was presenting to a very nice breakfast for the press people. One woman refered to a press badge as a beer badge.
This type of thing have gone on for quite a while. That is sometimes why you see a review that looks like a rehash of a press release and wonder, if the reviewer actually used it.
But if the signature is forged, how bad does the forgery have to be before they card merchant says, You got to be joking.
Maybe I am too suspicious of the people in Washington. Wasn't the movie "Distinguished Gentlemen" a documentary?
Lets rule out saying anything negative about the governments and large corporations. It only leads to anarchy.
Once you start on a slippery slope, how do you stop?
I suspect that they did. When my credit card number was stolen, the credit card company didn't care. They charged it back to the merchant. The merchant didn't press charges because it was not worth it to them.
What about blocking commercials on cruise ships? How about outlawing any movie with gambling?
There is a simpler solution that is already being implemented. Don't require payment of gambling debts on credit cards. There has been a couple of court cases where the credit card charges for these on-line gambling sites been reversed. If they can't get paid for people who lose money on their sites, they will have an incentive to ontrol themselves.
I have a real problem when the government or corporation dictates what I can or cannot read.
Why not ban all advertising on cruise ships that have gabling?
There is a simpler solution that is already being implemented. Don't require payment of gambling debts on credit cards. There has been a couple of court cases where the charges for these on-line gambling sites been reversed. If they can't get paid for people who lose money on their sites, they will have an incentive to control themselfs.
I thought my genome had a lifetime warranty. If it completely failed, I could come in for an exchange.
What If I want to install the Quicken program that was included, after wiping it because I was using Microsoft Money?
BTW: I always hated the CDs that don't allow you to install the products without wiping the entire system.
I use encryption, sometimes.
But there is a difference in using encryption and using encryption to prevent someone from exercising their fair use rights (DECSS). Or using encryption, then litigation, to prevent people from talking about screwed up products (CPHack).
She glossed over many of these issues.
Maybe one day, people will understand the issues. Most people take the attitude, "if you weren't doing anything wrong, you would not have a problem." If you don't libel a company, they won't bother you. If you are not a hacker, then they won't kick down your door.
Most people don't realize things effect them until, they are dragged off to the concentration camps.
They go after people who write viruses, they go after Mitnik?
Why don't they go after corporations that do the same sort of thing?