>>>Woah, hold up, when did that become a requirement
When the People, the holders of all power, declared it to be so. No warranty? Fine. We the People will simply stop buying your crappy products, until you give us a reasonable "satisfaction guaaranteed or money back" promise. It doesn't even have to be actual money - we'll take store credit.
But to sell us excrement like Transformers 2 - The Boredom on DVD, and then say "Too bad - you're not getting your 20 bucks back" is dishonest, non-customer friendly, and we've had enough. We the people will not buy any more of your product until you provide a reasonable warranty of merchantability, as the candy bar makers have done ("If you don't like your M&Ms, return unused portion for refund or credit.")
Look at Circuit City. They forgot that the customers are in charge, mistreated the customers, and drove themselves out of business. The movie and music makers appear to be headed down the same path.
>>>The RIAA seeks what it sees as damages, at least ostensibly; this is compensation, not punishment.
Yeah except the punishment has already been pre-determined by the Congress ($175,000 per song), and therefore Congress is committing an unconstitutional act (the fine is excessive and cruel).
>>>Scalia made a similar argument against the unconstitutionality of torture. It was brilliant! And someone should probably reword the eighth amendment...
""To consider the judges as the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions [is] a very dangerous doctrine indeed, and one which would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy. Our judges are as honest as other men and not more so. They have with others the same passions for party, for power, and the privilege of their corps. Their maxim is boni judicis est ampliare jurisdictionem [good justice is broad jurisdiction], and their power the more dangerous as they are in office for life and not responsible, as the other functionaries are, to the elective control. The Constitution has erected no such single tribunal, knowing that to whatever hands confided, with the corruptions of time and party, its members would become despots." - Thomas Jefferson, 1820
Jefferson went on to say it should be the STATES (in addition to the supreme court) that declares laws constitutional or unconstitutional (nullified). I agree with him which is why I wrote this:
The "Protect the 9th and 10th Amendments" Act. ----- Proposed Amendment XXVIII. ----- Section 1. After a Bill has become Law, if one-half of the States declare the Law to be "unconstitutional" it shall be null and void. It shall be as if the Law never existed. ----- Section 2. This article shall be inoperative, unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by the legislatures of three-fourths* of the several States by the date January 1, 2050. *[This is called a Constitutional majority in legal parlance.]
With our current system, you first have to wait until some government arrests you for a crime (for example: owning a gun in Washington DC). Then you have to file in court to defend yourself against this unconstitutional law. In most cases you'll lose, but if you're lucky it can rise to the level of the United States' government court who may or may not declare it unconstitutional.
That process took ~30 years to overturn D.C.'s unconstitutional banning of guns. With my proposed amendment, there'd be no need to wait. You (and your neighbors) could collectively instruct the State Legislature to declare the law "unconstitutional". Once 25 other legislatures have done the same, then the U.S. law would be voided.
My proposed amendment would simplify the process, shorten the time that an unconstitutional law sits on the books (2-3 years, not 30), and most-importantly, not require citizens to sit in jail or waste time in the courtroom.
>>>>They utterly wasted all the money they spent on the computers.
Government?
Wasteful?
No that can't be. (cough). Government is supposed to make everything run more efficiently. Right? (gag). Sorry. I have slight emphysema (cough) that's supposed to be fixed soon, but I'm on a 6-month waiting list with Canadian health services.
Anyway I don't believe your story about the government school wasting money. It simple doesn't fit with what we've been told by our beloved parliamentarians.
>>>>> Since these are civil cases I don't believe there is any "cruel and unusual" clause. >> >>When I read the Constitution it does not make any such exceptions. Nowhere does it say "oh, except for civil torts."
And also, the monetary fine ($175,000 per song?) was set by Congress, and Congress must obey the Supreme Law contained within the Constitution. IMHO Congresses' fine is nullified by the constitution.
If his share ratio was like most people, it was probably less than 1..... which means he never uploaded a whole song. He uploaded, say, 0.7 of a song which would be unplayable and therefore no harm done.
Also even if said person is not financially ruined, it would take that citizen the rest of his life to earn the money to pay-back the cash fine. In effect it's a life sentence to slavery for RIAA, simply because the person didn't legally buy ~$30 worth of songs. That IS excessive.
>>>How many proceedings does it take to realize what any idiot can discern?
It's too bad the guy with the airplane did not bomb the RIAA headquarters instead. (Yes I think these people are tyrants and deserve to die - just like what happened to Mussolini, King Louis of France and Emperor Nero.)
AND they are tired of getting screwed up the ass by dishonest corporations that refuse to offer a basic "satisfaction guaranteed" warranty. Hell even the chocolate bar companies offer that warranty ("If you are dissatisfied with your Snickers, return it for full refund.").
I grew tired of throwing-away my money on shitty CDs or boring movies, so now I try before I buy. If it's good I'll buy it to support the artists/engineers, but otherwise no.
The government will be unlikely to fine itself (the school). That was my point. Criminal charges will not be pressed for Pennsylvania versus itself, or if they are, the charges will be so lenient as to be effectively non-punishment.
Kinda similar to how our Treasury Secretary broke the law (did not pay taxes), but nobody ever bothered to charge him because he's part of the government. Government protects its own, and the school will be protected.
Unfortunately the U.S. DMCA provides no recourse to the victims. The IOC lawyers can just say, "Ooops sorry," and not even mean it. This law is skewed in favor of abuse.
There was a similar event ~3 weeks ago when the NFL tried to claim copyright over the "Who Dat?" logo. The NFL caused thousands (possibly millions) of dollars in damage to local businesses and all the NFL had to do was say, "Ooops... we were wrong." The victims have no recourse.
I think if I ever get one of these notices, I'll just ignore it. Fuck the megacorps.
Yeah but there's a difference between cameras catching teens having sex in a public area, and cameras that were snuck-into private homes and caught sex or nudity in the bedrooms.
I recall one landlord who mounted cameras in a tenant's apartment was severely prosecuted - not for child porn of course, but for invasion of privacy, production of lewd images, and so on. The school principal/teachers will face all of that PLUS the underage porn charge.
this is the THIRD time this Member State has been caught abusing teenagers' rights. Twice before teens were thrown into jail (for one night) because boyfriends/girlfriends were sending naked images of their own bodies to one another (naked humans; oh noes!), and now here's the third time this Member State was caught abusing the rights of our teenaged citizens.
I think this Pennsylvania Government is getting out of control. The sad part is, because this school is part of the government, it will probably not be charged. Government tends not to charge its own people, or if it does, the charges are so lenient as to be effectively no punishment at all.
But if WE did something like this, we'd spend 7 years in jail and have to wear a Scarlet Letter (name on a child molester list) for the rest of our lives. There are two standards for normal citizens and government citizens.
Oh come on people. This is the government leadership trying to protect us from terrorists by monitoring all internet communications. Did they make a mistake? Sure, but they are doing the BEST they can and they don't need our constantly criticizing them about problems they are already fully aware of.
/end sarcasm
I stole that quote from Babylon 5. In reality I find this story horrific. It violates Pennsylvania Constitutional rights (Article I; sections 8 and 25). I also note this is the THIRD time this Member State has been caught abusing teenagers' rights. Twice before teens were thrown into jail (for one night) because boyfriends/girlfriends were sending naked images of their own bodies to one another (naked humans; oh noes!), and now here's the third time this Member State was caught abusing the rights of our teenaged citizens.
I think this Pennsylvania Government is getting out of control. The sad part is, because this school is part of the government, it will probably not be charged. Government tends not to charge its own people, or if it does, the charges are so lenient as to be effectively no punishment at all.
But if WE did something like this, we'd spend 7 years in jail and have to wear a Scarlet Letter (name on a child molester list) for the rest of our lives. There are two standards for normal citizens and government citizens.
The person who marked this post -1 redundant needs to DEVELOP A FRAKKING *SENSEOFHUMOR*. Jeez. Loosen up. You're wound tighter than a girl at a middle school dance.
P.S. And the reason I'm being targeted (I believe) is because of my comments yesterday that I consider Linux to be inferior to Windows and Mac (as far as ease-of-use by the average John Q. Customer). Heaven forbid you criticize the Holy Bible, Sacred Koran, or the Beloved Ubuntu.
I'm beginning to suspect I'm being targeted. Nearly every one of my posts has been demodded -1 point (which drops me down to (0) score).
And there's nothing "offtopic" about agreeing with the previous poster's statement: "Don't reinvent the wheel. Look around, search for what's been done before and adapt it to suit your needs." That really is what I do in my day-to-day routine as an engineer.
Remember the internet was a LOT smaller in 1997, so while my preferred engine at that time (altavista) may not have been as good as google today, there was also a lot fewer websites to search through.
>>>I can see that you must be young enough never to have used the search engines you list
I'm familiar with the slashdot practice of not RTFA (reading the frakking article), but when did people stop reading user names? You think I'm young? My first computer was a Commodore and my second an Amiga. I was making music, producing primitive videos, and "surfing" the internet before the web even existed.
Monopolies are illegal in the U.S. so even if Microsoft did gain some right over all the water* they would quickly be disassembled by the government into smaller competing companies.
>>>buy off legislators.
Ahh well there you go. It is only because government exists that MS can buy off legislators and can special privileges. If government did not exist, there'd be no way for MS to gain these special privileges (like sucking money out of the taxpayer's treasury). GOVERNMENT is the root cause of all evil - as the last 2-3,000 years of history demonstrate.
* * An unlikely event since my water comes from directly under my feet, via a well that I had installed. No way for MS to gain control over MY property.
They could have used one of the other search engines in existence in 1997-98, like Altavista or Lycos or Magellan or WebCrawler or Yahoo or Excite or Hotbot.
Is Google a megacorp? Check. Did Google threaten to move to India if Obama raises corporate taxes? Check. Does Google spy on users and collect data? Check. Did Google receive monetary assistance from the Taxpayer's Public Treasury? Not sure.
Okay. I'll let them slide and not try to invalidate their pagerank patent, but that likely won't stop Microsoft from making the attempt.
>>>Don't reinvent the wheel. Look around, search for what's been done before and adapt it to suit your needs.
You just described my engineering job in a nutshell. I no longer create anything myself, but instead just search the internet for already-existing circuits, or cour through my company's back designs since the project has most-likely been done already.
As for ranking pages by links to other important pages, that's rather flawed? It would mean that foxnews.com and glennbeck.com would be ranked much, much higher than they deserve to be. [There that should earn me some bonus points and boost my damaged karma.]
In just the last ten years, the U.S. government has violated multiple parts of our Supreme Law: Congress shall make no law...abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble.....
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. [DC gun ban which was eventually overturned by the SCOTUS]
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated,.... [Police routinely bust down doors and enter without permission, or warrant. See Prof. Gates' home. Se Drug War.]
No person shall... be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation. [See Drug War.]
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people. [i.e. Our privacy rights are being violated with spying on our conversations and internet.]
And Last But Most Important:
The powers not delegated to the United States government by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
>>>I've re-read your post and it still seems to me that you are equating FBI wire tapping with Chinese wire tapping.
Yes that is EXACTLY what he did.
You then erected a strawman about 30 million dead, tanks running over people, and other outrageous events. Then you knocked down the strawman you built by saying "we're not as bad as that". That's a logical fallacy you committed. The author had the right to call you on it.
Anyway...
I agree with the author, especially after 6 years of Bush wire-tapping, and recent Obama decisions to track our cellphones like locater beacons ("citizens have no reasonable expectation of privacy on their phones). You cannot trust ANY government. Not Chinese. Not Australian (filtering). Not French (three strike law). And not American.
Slashdot Mirror
>>>Woah, hold up, when did that become a requirement
When the People, the holders of all power, declared it to be so. No warranty? Fine. We the People will simply stop buying your crappy products, until you give us a reasonable "satisfaction guaaranteed or money back" promise. It doesn't even have to be actual money - we'll take store credit.
But to sell us excrement like Transformers 2 - The Boredom on DVD, and then say "Too bad - you're not getting your 20 bucks back" is dishonest, non-customer friendly, and we've had enough. We the people will not buy any more of your product until you provide a reasonable warranty of merchantability, as the candy bar makers have done ("If you don't like your M&Ms, return unused portion for refund or credit.")
Look at Circuit City. They forgot that the customers are in charge, mistreated the customers, and drove themselves out of business. The movie and music makers appear to be headed down the same path.
>>>The RIAA seeks what it sees as damages, at least ostensibly; this is compensation, not punishment.
Yeah except the punishment has already been pre-determined by the Congress ($175,000 per song), and therefore Congress is committing an unconstitutional act (the fine is excessive and cruel).
>>>Scalia made a similar argument against the unconstitutionality of torture. It was brilliant! And someone should probably reword the eighth amendment...
""To consider the judges as the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions [is] a very dangerous doctrine indeed, and one which would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy. Our judges are as honest as other men and not more so. They have with others the same passions for party, for power, and the privilege of their corps. Their maxim is boni judicis est ampliare jurisdictionem [good justice is broad jurisdiction], and their power the more dangerous as they are in office for life and not responsible, as the other functionaries are, to the elective control. The Constitution has erected no such single tribunal, knowing that to whatever hands confided, with the corruptions of time and party, its members would become despots." - Thomas Jefferson, 1820
Jefferson went on to say it should be the STATES (in addition to the supreme court) that declares laws constitutional or unconstitutional (nullified). I agree with him which is why I wrote this:
The "Protect the 9th and 10th Amendments" Act. ----- Proposed Amendment XXVIII. ----- Section 1. After a Bill has become Law, if one-half of the States declare the Law to be "unconstitutional" it shall be null and void. It shall be as if the Law never existed. ----- Section 2. This article shall be inoperative, unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by the legislatures of three-fourths* of the several States by the date January 1, 2050. *[This is called a Constitutional majority in legal parlance.]
With our current system, you first have to wait until some government arrests you for a crime (for example: owning a gun in Washington DC). Then you have to file in court to defend yourself against this unconstitutional law. In most cases you'll lose, but if you're lucky it can rise to the level of the United States' government court who may or may not declare it unconstitutional.
That process took ~30 years to overturn D.C.'s unconstitutional banning of guns. With my proposed amendment, there'd be no need to wait. You (and your neighbors) could collectively instruct the State Legislature to declare the law "unconstitutional". Once 25 other legislatures have done the same, then the U.S. law would be voided.
My proposed amendment would simplify the process, shorten the time that an unconstitutional law sits on the books (2-3 years, not 30), and most-importantly, not require citizens to sit in jail or waste time in the courtroom.
>>>>They utterly wasted all the money they spent on the computers.
Government?
Wasteful?
No that can't be. (cough). Government is supposed to make everything run more efficiently. Right? (gag). Sorry. I have slight emphysema (cough) that's supposed to be fixed soon, but I'm on a 6-month waiting list with Canadian health services.
Anyway I don't believe your story about the government school wasting money. It simple doesn't fit with what we've been told by our beloved parliamentarians.
>>>>> Since these are civil cases I don't believe there is any "cruel and unusual" clause.
>>
>>When I read the Constitution it does not make any such exceptions. Nowhere does it say "oh, except for civil torts."
And also, the monetary fine ($175,000 per song?) was set by Congress, and Congress must obey the Supreme Law contained within the Constitution. IMHO Congresses' fine is nullified by the constitution.
If his share ratio was like most people, it was probably less than 1..... which means he never uploaded a whole song. He uploaded, say, 0.7 of a song which would be unplayable and therefore no harm done.
>>> "From Hell's heart I stab at thee
>>> "For hate's sake, I spit my last breath at thee."
And with my sharpshooter I have your RIAA office in my sights.
Are you sure you don't want to drop the case Mr. RIAA employee? (click)
Also even if said person is not financially ruined, it would take that citizen the rest of his life to earn the money to pay-back the cash fine. In effect it's a life sentence to slavery for RIAA, simply because the person didn't legally buy ~$30 worth of songs. That IS excessive.
>>>How many proceedings does it take to realize what any idiot can discern?
It's too bad the guy with the airplane did not bomb the RIAA headquarters instead. (Yes I think these people are tyrants and deserve to die - just like what happened to Mussolini, King Louis of France and Emperor Nero.)
AND they are tired of getting screwed up the ass by dishonest corporations that refuse to offer a basic "satisfaction guaranteed" warranty. Hell even the chocolate bar companies offer that warranty ("If you are dissatisfied with your Snickers, return it for full refund.").
I grew tired of throwing-away my money on shitty CDs or boring movies, so now I try before I buy. If it's good I'll buy it to support the artists/engineers, but otherwise no.
The government will be unlikely to fine itself (the school). That was my point. Criminal charges will not be pressed for Pennsylvania versus itself, or if they are, the charges will be so lenient as to be effectively non-punishment.
Kinda similar to how our Treasury Secretary broke the law (did not pay taxes), but nobody ever bothered to charge him because he's part of the government. Government protects its own, and the school will be protected.
Unfortunately the U.S. DMCA provides no recourse to the victims. The IOC lawyers can just say, "Ooops sorry," and not even mean it. This law is skewed in favor of abuse.
There was a similar event ~3 weeks ago when the NFL tried to claim copyright over the "Who Dat?" logo. The NFL caused thousands (possibly millions) of dollars in damage to local businesses and all the NFL had to do was say, "Ooops... we were wrong." The victims have no recourse.
I think if I ever get one of these notices, I'll just ignore it. Fuck the megacorps.
Yeah but there's a difference between cameras catching teens having sex in a public area, and cameras that were snuck-into private homes and caught sex or nudity in the bedrooms.
I recall one landlord who mounted cameras in a tenant's apartment was severely prosecuted - not for child porn of course, but for invasion of privacy, production of lewd images, and so on. The school principal/teachers will face all of that PLUS the underage porn charge.
this is the THIRD time this Member State has been caught abusing teenagers' rights. Twice before teens were thrown into jail (for one night) because boyfriends/girlfriends were sending naked images of their own bodies to one another (naked humans; oh noes!), and now here's the third time this Member State was caught abusing the rights of our teenaged citizens.
I think this Pennsylvania Government is getting out of control. The sad part is, because this school is part of the government, it will probably not be charged. Government tends not to charge its own people, or if it does, the charges are so lenient as to be effectively no punishment at all.
But if WE did something like this, we'd spend 7 years in jail and have to wear a Scarlet Letter (name on a child molester list) for the rest of our lives. There are two standards for normal citizens and government citizens.
Oh come on people. This is the government leadership trying to protect us from terrorists by monitoring all internet communications. Did they make a mistake? Sure, but they are doing the BEST they can and they don't need our constantly criticizing them about problems they are already fully aware of.
/end sarcasm
I stole that quote from Babylon 5. In reality I find this story horrific. It violates Pennsylvania Constitutional rights (Article I; sections 8 and 25). I also note this is the THIRD time this Member State has been caught abusing teenagers' rights. Twice before teens were thrown into jail (for one night) because boyfriends/girlfriends were sending naked images of their own bodies to one another (naked humans; oh noes!), and now here's the third time this Member State was caught abusing the rights of our teenaged citizens.
I think this Pennsylvania Government is getting out of control. The sad part is, because this school is part of the government, it will probably not be charged. Government tends not to charge its own people, or if it does, the charges are so lenient as to be effectively no punishment at all.
But if WE did something like this, we'd spend 7 years in jail and have to wear a Scarlet Letter (name on a child molester list) for the rest of our lives. There are two standards for normal citizens and government citizens.
The person who marked this post -1 redundant needs to DEVELOP A FRAKKING *SENSEOFHUMOR*. Jeez. Loosen up. You're wound tighter than a girl at a middle school dance.
P.S. And the reason I'm being targeted (I believe) is because of my comments yesterday that I consider Linux to be inferior to Windows and Mac (as far as ease-of-use by the average John Q. Customer). Heaven forbid you criticize the Holy Bible, Sacred Koran, or the Beloved Ubuntu.
The zealots will stone you.
I'm beginning to suspect I'm being targeted. Nearly every one of my posts has been demodded -1 point (which drops me down to (0) score).
And there's nothing "offtopic" about agreeing with the previous poster's statement: "Don't reinvent the wheel. Look around, search for what's been done before and adapt it to suit your needs." That really is what I do in my day-to-day routine as an engineer.
Remember the internet was a LOT smaller in 1997, so while my preferred engine at that time (altavista) may not have been as good as google today, there was also a lot fewer websites to search through.
>>>I can see that you must be young enough never to have used the search engines you list
I'm familiar with the slashdot practice of not RTFA (reading the frakking article), but when did people stop reading user names? You think I'm young? My first computer was a Commodore and my second an Amiga. I was making music, producing primitive videos, and "surfing" the internet before the web even existed.
Monopolies are illegal in the U.S. so even if Microsoft did gain some right over all the water* they would quickly be disassembled by the government into smaller competing companies.
>>>buy off legislators.
Ahh well there you go. It is only because government exists that MS can buy off legislators and can special privileges. If government did not exist, there'd be no way for MS to gain these special privileges (like sucking money out of the taxpayer's treasury). GOVERNMENT is the root cause of all evil - as the last 2-3,000 years of history demonstrate.
*
* An unlikely event since my water comes from directly under my feet, via a well that I had installed. No way for MS to gain control over MY property.
They could have used one of the other search engines in existence in 1997-98, like Altavista or Lycos or Magellan or WebCrawler or Yahoo or Excite or Hotbot.
CHECKLIST:
Is Google a megacorp? Check.
Did Google threaten to move to India if Obama raises corporate taxes? Check.
Does Google spy on users and collect data? Check.
Did Google receive monetary assistance from the Taxpayer's Public Treasury? Not sure.
Okay. I'll let them slide and not try to invalidate their pagerank patent, but that likely won't stop Microsoft from making the attempt.
>>>Don't reinvent the wheel. Look around, search for what's been done before and adapt it to suit your needs.
You just described my engineering job in a nutshell. I no longer create anything myself, but instead just search the internet for already-existing circuits, or cour through my company's back designs since the project has most-likely been done already.
As for ranking pages by links to other important pages, that's rather flawed? It would mean that foxnews.com and glennbeck.com would be ranked much, much higher than they deserve to be. [There that should earn me some bonus points and boost my damaged karma.]
In just the last ten years, the U.S. government has violated multiple parts of our Supreme Law: Congress shall make no law...abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble.....
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. [DC gun ban which was eventually overturned by the SCOTUS]
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, .... [Police routinely bust down doors and enter without permission, or warrant. See Prof. Gates' home. Se Drug War.]
No person shall... be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation. [See Drug War.]
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people. [i.e. Our privacy rights are being violated with spying on our conversations and internet.]
And Last But Most Important:
The powers not delegated to the United States government by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
>>>I've re-read your post and it still seems to me that you are equating FBI wire tapping with Chinese wire tapping.
Yes that is EXACTLY what he did.
You then erected a strawman about 30 million dead, tanks running over people, and other outrageous events. Then you knocked down the strawman you built by saying "we're not as bad as that". That's a logical fallacy you committed. The author had the right to call you on it.
Anyway...
I agree with the author, especially after 6 years of Bush wire-tapping, and recent Obama decisions to track our cellphones like locater beacons ("citizens have no reasonable expectation of privacy on their phones). You cannot trust ANY government. Not Chinese. Not Australian (filtering). Not French (three strike law). And not American.