Why should I have to make over $125,000/year to live comfortably when I can make under half elsewhere in the country and be equally content? Why should I be forced to rent unless I can afford a million dollars for a house? How am I supposed to lay down roots?
Why should you expect that cost of living should be the same everywhere? Why should owning a house always be within your means? I live in SF and make six figs just to pay back my grad loans and pay rent. I'm still happy with living here because I like to hang out at the beach (I almost said swim in the ocean) then drive up to ski in Tahoe, weather permitting. Compare that with central Kansas. Nothing wrong with Kansas but I don't see people flocking to it.
It's expensive because lots of people recognize how great it is to live here. That doesn't mean that everyone actually can live here.
per plane! All that times number of planes in the air, to solve a very limited problem. Black boxes work most of the time. There are very few entirely missing flights.
Set up a dummy WEP-secured AP and teach them how to get on. Check out http://www.securitytube.net/groups?operation=view&groupId=9 for a good instructional video. You'll have to provide a few Alfa cards though. Have them work in teams of three or four and you won't need many.
Seriously. They will learn not to run WEP on their own APs nor to trust WEP APs in the wild. And since most people don't run WEP anymore, you aren't really setting them up for a life of criminal hacking. But it is just devious enough to entertain kids (and some adults).
I didn't just RTFHeadline but read the whole story and nowhere does it mention CO2 influencing the size of crab growth. In fact, quite the opposite, the article says that crabs don't feed as well under higher CO2. The article barely mentions CO2 and is really about conservation efforts of oysters and crabs.
I haven't finished the book nor did I finish this review. The osso buko was the only one I tried and I used chicken(!) instead of veal or lamb. But it was great! That is where you lost me. From what you wrote about this recipe, you over-thought it. My enjoyment in cooking is partially from winging it, making things works, learning new stuff like what dry wine is. Simply following exact instructions is just assembly-line work.
I bought the book for the first few chapters about Tim's approach to learning not about learning to cook specifically. I've always thought that if I woke up in the future, the first thing I would do is find out the latest technology to get information into my head. Learning quickly is a tremendous skill and one I'm still working on, after three college degrees.
Having said that, the book wasn't a revelation but I enjoy returning to those first chapters when I'm about to start a new project. They fire me up and focus me on how I should approach something new.
I had a contractor colleague who used to outsource, In The Same Office. Here was his scam: 1) Approach programmer #1 and say, "I'm new here and I want to work within the established company guidelines. How would you organize this?" 2) Approach programmer #2 and say, "I'm thinking of organizing my project like so because that fits in the company guidelines. I'm curious about your thoughts on this first step." 3)... 4) Profit!
The lazy employee in TFA is a master of labor arbitrage.
the GE subjects? They can be interesting and learning more makes you a better person, programmer, spouse, parent, neighbor, voter, etc. Learning and school, in general, really don't have to be bad things which you try to escape.
You mean "the" problem, right? There's a meme that needs to spread, and quickly: Measuring reality against an idealized system and judging the mismatches is an intellectual and moral defect.
I was trying to tease out what exactly Mr. Beckerman was railing against with his comment "yes her poverty and illness and depression were factors in her failing to respond on time, since it is usually impossible for someone in her position to get a lawyer to take her case." Specifically, I wanted to make a point that his use of 'illness' was FUD. However, my response does come over as tongue-in-cheek and that is not appropriate here.
You construct your idealized system was constructed in light of goals, and it is by those larger goals that aspects of reality must be judged. The natural consequence of such thinking is a certain degree of pragmatism. It's not like this is trademark law -- you're not going to lose your rights if you don't pursue your copyright aggressively. This is a tort.
I agree with the difference b/n copyright and trademark law. Are you saying that, unlike trademark, just because you _can_ sue to protect your copyright, you don't _have_ to? Is it fair to extend this to say that the RIAA _should not_ have sued to protect in this case? Would this bring up issues of discrimination, if some people get sued and others don't? How should the RIAA select who they go after? How can this be done 'fairly', by whatever standard of fairness you want? I'm not against the idea of more selective enforcement. I just think it could use some fleshing out.
Thanks for the info. I only read the story off of one of the links and it didn't mention this stuff. I'm too tired to verify so I'll take your word:-) Sounds like one case where the RIAA sued the mother. Mom said she didn't do it and she didn't have exclusive control of the computer. RIAA (eventually) drops suit on Mom and sues Daughter and Husband. The RIAA messed up a little in not dropping against Mom soon enough. So maybe they will learn their lesson here and drop against the ill girl and go after Dad?
1. No we're not "in the same boat". I have a lot more experience seeing the pain in the eyes, and hearing the pain in the voices, of the victims of this terror campaign. And apparently I don't have your cold and dispassionate way of looking at it.
Yes, you have more experience in this. But even I feel bad when a student or university employee gets hit with a "Settle for $4000 (if you are lucky) or go to court!". Unfortunately, that is the law right now. As part of a _solution_, I think the $750 statutory damages should be revisited and settlement amount be made more flexible. But that is just me being "cold and dispassionate" again.
2. I have a simple "solution". The judges should apply the law, like this one
The underlined statement in the summary talks about the RIAA possibly using threat of lawsuit to force settlements. Yes, forcing settlement through threat of lawsuit is bad for defendants. Also bad is preventing valid lawsuits to protect copyrights. An individual, independent artist has the same right to file a suit to collect $750/infringement or settle as the RIAA does so I don't think it is entirely fair to pick on the RIAA for using the law as it stands.
As far as solutions go, I want to see the RIAA be more reasonable and flexible in the amount the sue for and the amount they will settle for.
This case talked about the invalidity of the 'Making Available' argument. Yes, I disagree with 'Making Available' also. The hard part is this, to prove that someone actually distributed copyright-protected digital content, you have to listen to all the network traffic going into or out of their computer and watch for your work to go across. This is a serious invasion of privacy. There needs to be some way to gather an amount of information that lends credible belief that a copyrighted work was distributed yet without being such an invasion of privacy. I'll admit, even with a graduate degree in IT and years of experience as a programmer and sys admin, I haven't been able to come up with any good ideas on this one, yet:-)
Ah yes, failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. I fired up Westlaw and read the RIAA's amended complaint. I saw that this case was cited in the Elektra case you mentioned above. What did the court have to say about this case(Interscope)? "Defendant notes that in a recent case, Interscope Records v. Rodriguez, No. 06-CV-2485, 2007 WL 2408484 (S.D.Cal. Aug. 17, 2007), a federal district court applied the Twombly pleading standard and held that a complaint similar to the one in this case did not sufficiently state a claim upon which relief could be granted. See id. at *1. Respectfully, the Court is unpersuaded that Twombly demands such a restrictive interpretation of the Rule 8(a) pleading standard." So the 'law' here is not settled.
Mr. Beckerman, you and I are in the same boat, sort of. But I still have to call FUD here. You are using the same inflammatory remarks used in other religious wars that serve only to weaken your otherwise valid arguments.
-I don't bring lawsuits against helpless people -I wouldn't accept any client who wanted me to do that
Neither of those make it illegal or even wrong to file suit against 'helpless people'. As long as the claim isn't frivolous, it is within the RIAA's rights to bring it. Are you challenging the veracity of MediaSentry's (or whoever they are now) data collection? That might be a valid argument.
-yes she is innocent, as anyone knows who RTFA
I RTFA and I only saw her claim that she didn't do it. Granted there were a few links to different sources covering the story. Can you post a link to the coverage that made the compelling argument to her innocence, please? I know the 'innocent until proven guilty" line but that doesn't mean just saying 'Innocent!' keeps you from having to defend yourself. Here is the URL I read: http://www.p2pnet.net/story/17765
-it is not really newsworthy that she is innocent because of the 40,000 people sued by the RIAA, probably 20,000 to 30,000 are innocent
Ok, this is the one that sticks in my craw. Back this up with some cites. My personal experience (with a very limited n of 5 or so) shows that all of them had Limewire or some such software installed, on default settings, downloading and sharing songs.
-yes defendant's illness makes it more morally opprobrious to sue her, without at least investigating beforehand to make sure she is in fact liable for copyright infringement, especially when -- as in these cases -- the plaintiffs' actual damages are probably in the neighborhood of $3 or $4
Really? What level of illness triggers this heightened standard for plaintiffs? I haven't heard about that in law school. What more should they do besides identify an IP address purportedly sharing music and linking that IP with a name? What more _can_ they do? Also, do you really believe the $3 damage argument? Sure, if they were only downloading a song, the damages would be the market value of $1 (Thanks iTunes!) But if they are truly distributing (directly or contributarily), then the damages go up for each infringement. This could be 100s or even 1000s of dollars. Agreed, it isn't the $750/infringement the law allows but again, that is something that should be changed.
-yes it matters that she is sick and impoverished because being subjected to a lawsuit gives such people more anxiety and depression, and more severely impairs their health, than it would to someone who is healthy and has plenty of money
I agree with you here. Maybe more pro bono work from lawyers for sick and impoverished people? Maybe a more efficient and simple system of presenting and defending against claims so that non-lawyers can represent themselves in most cases? I'm not being cynical here. I agree that there is room for improvement.
-these types of cases demonstrate more vividly than others how ridiculous, cruel, and immoral the RIAA's suits are, and what an embarrassment they are to the federal court system which has permitted them to exist
As far as I can tell, under the current law, copyright holders have the right to enforce their copyright through lawsuits. Why all the FUD here?
-yes her poverty and illness and depression were factors in her failing to respond on time, since it is usually impossible for someone in her position to get a lawyer to take her case.
Are you saying that lawyers won't represent sick people? No, so the illness part is FUD. Are you saying that lawyers tend not to represent poor people? I agree, that is a problem. Especially since the byzantine legal system requires s
The fact she was in the hospital made it impossible for her to respond to the complaint thus why she has a default judgement on her. They likely served her, and not her parents and thus her being in the hospital meant she never opened her mail.
So yes her being sick is relevant, they would never have gotten as far as they did if she had not been sick.
I'm not a big fan of the RIAA either but I've got to make some counterpoints... * I've been in a hospital. It doesn't necessarily mean you can't read your mail. I read the story and it didn't mention anything about that. * IF she infringed and IF she has no money, there are mechanisms by which to report that to the court. Which leads to... * Neither sickness nor penury absolves you from legal transgressions. They may affect how much you have to pay in the end but you still have to present yourself to the court. Or settle.
As a 3L, I've worked with people in the RIAA's sights. Fact is, most of them _did_ illegally download songs and the software they used _did_ illegally share those songs with others. They didn't know the songs were being shared. They didn't mean for the songs to be shared but that knowledge isn't part of the law. Should the Copyright laws be updated to reflect the current state of the US? Sure but until they are, these people are breaking the law. Don't whine about the RIAA. Talk to your Congressman! Make a change.
P.S. They don't file 'blindly'. They file suits against 'John/Jane Does', use that to get Court permission to take the last step (subpoena names form ISP) and then amend the suit to name that person. If you have an issue with that, I'd like to hear some proposals about a better way to go from an IP/MAC address to a person's name.
Just did a report about business patents. Non-obviousness, a requirement of Patents (35 USC 102?), isn't proven by looking at something and saying "Duh!" You need to show prior art preferably enough prior art examples to cover all of Akamai's claims.
I remember going to Eastman Kodak Family Day in Rochester, NY. My dad worked there (back when you held one job for your entire career). They had a robotic warehouse or two back around 1980. I stood in line so I could perform this task:
1) Look up item in a paper catalog, with help from a Kodak(tm) Employee. 2) Type the character code in a terminal and hit enter. 3) Watch through the windows while automated forklift-things sped away and returned with a pallet of your desired product.
This warehouse also had automated delivery carts. Like a golf cart that followed lines painted on the ground to deliver product around the warehouse. I was told that they never ran over people. I think my dad rolled his eyes when the tour guide said that.
I also remember signing my name on a screen and getting a printout of it and watching industrial-strength dot matrix printers print out artwork from overtyped ASCII characters ("The Wave Of The Future!") Still have Kodak schwag pens and automatic pencils that I use.
As a former TechTV employee, I'm glad they are removing the name. It really brought down what I remembered about TTV. As others have noted, the purchase of TTV was all about the distribution rights. G4 wasn't that serious about the web content. At first they only wanted the last few months. We had to convince them to take it all. I still get stories from TTV-ers on the inside about how terrible it is there. Plus the Wil Wheaton expose... And if any former TTV employees want to start it all up again, I'm still unemployed...and I still have the CVS repository on my computer.
Ahh, the old Apple! I loved the manuals. My parents still have the whole thing, but I'll swipe the manuals next time I'm home. I don't remember the names but one had a light brown color, complete with fold-out schematics and some hairy, low-level shit that impressed me even though I was only 12.
I have two nephews and I'm also thinking about how to introduce them to programming. The older one(4) can already type/send me emails. I think a take-off on a game I enjoyed as a kid would be a good introduction. Basically, you have a series of rooms guarded by evil robots (with frickin' laser beams!TM) You can reprogram your own robot to go into the room and grab the item. In the old Apple game, you had logic gates and simple sensors but I think I would change it to software/programming challenge. So you learn to make wall-hugging robots, criss-crossing robots, concentric-circle robots, etc.
Anyway, it's on the back burner. Mebbe it already exists? Ah hah, Google tells me it was "Robot Odyssey (1984, The Learning Company)" and that there is a GNU Robots. I don't know if it is easy enough for children, or for me!
I pulled the trigger...
on
TechTV.com RIP
·
· Score: 2, Informative
I'm a sys-admin at TTV and my claim to fame is that I made the DNS change on the TechTV end that redirected all traffic to g4tv.com AFAIK, TechTV is no more. I know it is called a merger but I think a more appropriate term here is a scavenge. Comcast bought us and G4 picked the best parts of the carcass. It definitely isn't a meeting of minds to take the best of each channel.
In reverse order... 3) We haven't discussed distributing our content. 2) I don't think I can legally send it out. Comcast/G4 bought us and IANAL but the content is part of what they bought. If they want to flush it down the toilet, that is their choice b/c they own it. 1) Go ahead and scrape it. Better yet, get lots of people to scrape it. Drive up the hits! Our traffic has risen the last six months. The website traffic and ad sales has been on fire. It is kinda sad to see it go...
My best memory of this whole purchase process (it has been going on for a year now) is how it was described as a 'Win-Win' situation when it finally went through...
I work (still) at TechTV, in the IT department. AFAIK, next to nothing from the website is being kept. I know that G4 posted a job for an Oracle DBA to transition our DB to their MS SQL. We contacted them on it and they took the job down (google cache: http://66.102.7.104/search?q=cache:E3Q1eTpUtU0J:ww w.entertainmentcareers.net/jobid.asp%3Fjcode%3D229 34+G4+DBA&hl=en )
A PHB at G4 has his blog at http://hardwarewhore.com/ Classy, no? Not hard to see that they are going to leave a big, flaming divot in the ground.
Slashdot Mirror
David Macauley did this decades ago.
Why should I have to make over $125,000/year to live comfortably when I can make under half elsewhere in the country and be equally content? Why should I be forced to rent unless I can afford a million dollars for a house? How am I supposed to lay down roots?
Why should you expect that cost of living should be the same everywhere? Why should owning a house always be within your means? I live in SF and make six figs just to pay back my grad loans and pay rent. I'm still happy with living here because I like to hang out at the beach (I almost said swim in the ocean) then drive up to ski in Tahoe, weather permitting. Compare that with central Kansas. Nothing wrong with Kansas but I don't see people flocking to it.
It's expensive because lots of people recognize how great it is to live here. That doesn't mean that everyone actually can live here.
per plane! All that times number of planes in the air, to solve a very limited problem. Black boxes work most of the time. There are very few entirely missing flights.
Set up a dummy WEP-secured AP and teach them how to get on. Check out http://www.securitytube.net/groups?operation=view&groupId=9 for a good instructional video. You'll have to provide a few Alfa cards though. Have them work in teams of three or four and you won't need many.
Seriously. They will learn not to run WEP on their own APs nor to trust WEP APs in the wild. And since most people don't run WEP anymore, you aren't really setting them up for a life of criminal hacking. But it is just devious enough to entertain kids (and some adults).
I didn't just RTFHeadline but read the whole story and nowhere does it mention CO2 influencing the size of crab growth. In fact, quite the opposite, the article says that crabs don't feed as well under higher CO2. The article barely mentions CO2 and is really about conservation efforts of oysters and crabs.
I haven't finished the book nor did I finish this review. The osso buko was the only one I tried and I used chicken(!) instead of veal or lamb. But it was great! That is where you lost me. From what you wrote about this recipe, you over-thought it. My enjoyment in cooking is partially from winging it, making things works, learning new stuff like what dry wine is. Simply following exact instructions is just assembly-line work.
I bought the book for the first few chapters about Tim's approach to learning not about learning to cook specifically. I've always thought that if I woke up in the future, the first thing I would do is find out the latest technology to get information into my head. Learning quickly is a tremendous skill and one I'm still working on, after three college degrees.
Having said that, the book wasn't a revelation but I enjoy returning to those first chapters when I'm about to start a new project. They fire me up and focus me on how I should approach something new.
I had a contractor colleague who used to outsource, In The Same Office. Here was his scam: ...
1) Approach programmer #1 and say, "I'm new here and I want to work within the established company guidelines. How would you organize this?"
2) Approach programmer #2 and say, "I'm thinking of organizing my project like so because that fits in the company guidelines. I'm curious about your thoughts on this first step."
3)
4) Profit!
The lazy employee in TFA is a master of labor arbitrage.
Eric B.
> In all senses, it's a better solution
Ammonia? Not in my sense of smell.
Tell me when they have a silver/Mendocino Oatmeal Stout solution.
...once they have these new mass-storage devices, how can I turn it into a homebrew tunnel scanning microscope?
the GE subjects? They can be interesting and learning more makes you a better person, programmer, spouse, parent, neighbor, voter, etc. Learning and school, in general, really don't have to be bad things which you try to escape.
You mean "the" problem, right? There's a meme that needs to spread, and quickly: Measuring reality against an idealized system and judging the mismatches is an intellectual and moral defect.
I was trying to tease out what exactly Mr. Beckerman was railing against with his comment "yes her poverty and illness and depression were factors in her failing to respond on time, since it is usually impossible for someone in her position to get a lawyer to take her case." Specifically, I wanted to make a point that his use of 'illness' was FUD. However, my response does come over as tongue-in-cheek and that is not appropriate here.
You construct your idealized system was constructed in light of goals, and it is by those larger goals that aspects of reality must be judged. The natural consequence of such thinking is a certain degree of pragmatism. It's not like this is trademark law -- you're not going to lose your rights if you don't pursue your copyright aggressively. This is a tort.
I agree with the difference b/n copyright and trademark law. Are you saying that, unlike trademark, just because you _can_ sue to protect your copyright, you don't _have_ to? Is it fair to extend this to say that the RIAA _should not_ have sued to protect in this case?
Would this bring up issues of discrimination, if some people get sued and others don't? How should the RIAA select who they go after? How can this be done 'fairly', by whatever standard of fairness you want?
I'm not against the idea of more selective enforcement. I just think it could use some fleshing out.
Thanks for the info. I only read the story off of one of the links and it didn't mention this stuff. I'm too tired to verify so I'll take your word :-)
Sounds like one case where the RIAA sued the mother. Mom said she didn't do it and she didn't have exclusive control of the computer. RIAA (eventually) drops suit on Mom and sues Daughter and Husband. The RIAA messed up a little in not dropping against Mom soon enough. So maybe they will learn their lesson here and drop against the ill girl and go after Dad?
1. No we're not "in the same boat". I have a lot more experience seeing the pain in the eyes, and hearing the pain in the voices, of the victims of this terror campaign. And apparently I don't have your cold and dispassionate way of looking at it.
Yes, you have more experience in this. But even I feel bad when a student or university employee gets hit with a "Settle for $4000 (if you are lucky) or go to court!". Unfortunately, that is the law right now.
As part of a _solution_, I think the $750 statutory damages should be revisited and settlement amount be made more flexible. But that is just me being "cold and dispassionate" again.
2. I have a simple "solution". The judges should apply the law, like this one
The underlined statement in the summary talks about the RIAA possibly using threat of lawsuit to force settlements. Yes, forcing settlement through threat of lawsuit is bad for defendants. Also bad is preventing valid lawsuits to protect copyrights. An individual, independent artist has the same right to file a suit to collect $750/infringement or settle as the RIAA does so I don't think it is entirely fair to pick on the RIAA for using the law as it stands.
As far as solutions go, I want to see the RIAA be more reasonable and flexible in the amount the sue for and the amount they will settle for.
and this one
This case talked about the invalidity of the 'Making Available' argument. Yes, I disagree with 'Making Available' also. The hard part is this, to prove that someone actually distributed copyright-protected digital content, you have to listen to all the network traffic going into or out of their computer and watch for your work to go across. This is a serious invasion of privacy. There needs to be some way to gather an amount of information that lends credible belief that a copyrighted work was distributed yet without being such an invasion of privacy. I'll admit, even with a graduate degree in IT and years of experience as a programmer and sys admin, I haven't been able to come up with any good ideas on this one, yet :-)
and this one.
Ah yes, failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. I fired up Westlaw and read the RIAA's amended complaint. I saw that this case was cited in the Elektra case you mentioned above. What did the court have to say about this case(Interscope)?
"Defendant notes that in a recent case, Interscope Records v. Rodriguez, No. 06-CV-2485, 2007 WL 2408484 (S.D.Cal. Aug. 17, 2007), a federal district court applied the Twombly pleading standard and held that a complaint similar to the one in this case did not sufficiently state a claim upon which relief could be granted. See id. at *1. Respectfully, the Court is unpersuaded that Twombly demands such a restrictive interpretation of the Rule 8(a) pleading standard."
So the 'law' here is not settled.
Open to discussion,
Eric B
Mr. Beckerman, you and I are in the same boat, sort of. But I still have to call FUD here. You are using the same inflammatory remarks used in other religious wars that serve only to weaken your otherwise valid arguments.
-I don't bring lawsuits against helpless people
-I wouldn't accept any client who wanted me to do that
Neither of those make it illegal or even wrong to file suit against 'helpless people'. As long as the claim isn't frivolous, it is within the RIAA's rights to bring it. Are you challenging the veracity of MediaSentry's (or whoever they are now) data collection? That might be a valid argument.
-yes she is innocent, as anyone knows who RTFA
I RTFA and I only saw her claim that she didn't do it. Granted there were a few links to different sources covering the story. Can you post a link to the coverage that made the compelling argument to her innocence, please?
I know the 'innocent until proven guilty" line but that doesn't mean just saying 'Innocent!' keeps you from having to defend yourself.
Here is the URL I read:
http://www.p2pnet.net/story/17765
-it is not really newsworthy that she is innocent because of the 40,000 people sued by the RIAA, probably 20,000 to 30,000 are innocent
Ok, this is the one that sticks in my craw. Back this up with some cites. My personal experience (with a very limited n of 5 or so) shows that all of them had Limewire or some such software installed, on default settings, downloading and sharing songs.
-yes defendant's illness makes it more morally opprobrious to sue her, without at least investigating beforehand to make sure she is in fact liable for copyright infringement, especially when -- as in these cases -- the plaintiffs' actual damages are probably in the neighborhood of $3 or $4
Really? What level of illness triggers this heightened standard for plaintiffs? I haven't heard about that in law school.
What more should they do besides identify an IP address purportedly sharing music and linking that IP with a name? What more _can_ they do?
Also, do you really believe the $3 damage argument? Sure, if they were only downloading a song, the damages would be the market value of $1 (Thanks iTunes!) But if they are truly distributing (directly or contributarily), then the damages go up for each infringement. This could be 100s or even 1000s of dollars. Agreed, it isn't the $750/infringement the law allows but again, that is something that should be changed.
-yes it matters that she is sick and impoverished because being subjected to a lawsuit gives such people more anxiety and depression, and more severely impairs their health, than it would to someone who is healthy and has plenty of money
I agree with you here. Maybe more pro bono work from lawyers for sick and impoverished people? Maybe a more efficient and simple system of presenting and defending against claims so that non-lawyers can represent themselves in most cases? I'm not being cynical here. I agree that there is room for improvement.
-these types of cases demonstrate more vividly than others how ridiculous, cruel, and immoral the RIAA's suits are, and what an embarrassment they are to the federal court system which has permitted them to exist
As far as I can tell, under the current law, copyright holders have the right to enforce their copyright through lawsuits. Why all the FUD here?
-yes her poverty and illness and depression were factors in her failing to respond on time, since it is usually impossible for someone in her position to get a lawyer to take her case.
Are you saying that lawyers won't represent sick people? No, so the illness part is FUD. Are you saying that lawyers tend not to represent poor people? I agree, that is a problem. Especially since the byzantine legal system requires s
The fact she was in the hospital made it impossible for her to respond to the complaint thus why she has a default judgement on her. They likely served her, and not her parents and thus her being in the hospital meant she never opened her mail.
So yes her being sick is relevant, they would never have gotten as far as they did if she had not been sick.
I'm not a big fan of the RIAA either but I've got to make some counterpoints...
* I've been in a hospital. It doesn't necessarily mean you can't read your mail. I read the story and it didn't mention anything about that.
* IF she infringed and IF she has no money, there are mechanisms by which to report that to the court. Which leads to...
* Neither sickness nor penury absolves you from legal transgressions. They may affect how much you have to pay in the end but you still have to present yourself to the court. Or settle.
As a 3L, I've worked with people in the RIAA's sights. Fact is, most of them _did_ illegally download songs and the software they used _did_ illegally share those songs with others. They didn't know the songs were being shared. They didn't mean for the songs to be shared but that knowledge isn't part of the law.
Should the Copyright laws be updated to reflect the current state of the US? Sure but until they are, these people are breaking the law. Don't whine about the RIAA. Talk to your Congressman! Make a change.
P.S. They don't file 'blindly'. They file suits against 'John/Jane Does', use that to get Court permission to take the last step (subpoena names form ISP) and then amend the suit to name that person. If you have an issue with that, I'd like to hear some proposals about a better way to go from an IP/MAC address to a person's name.
Just did a report about business patents. Non-obviousness, a requirement of Patents (35 USC 102?), isn't proven by looking at something and saying "Duh!" You need to show prior art preferably enough prior art examples to cover all of Akamai's claims.
I remember going to Eastman Kodak Family Day in Rochester, NY. My dad worked there (back when you held one job for your entire career). They had a robotic warehouse or two back around 1980. I stood in line so I could perform this task:
1) Look up item in a paper catalog, with help from a Kodak(tm) Employee.
2) Type the character code in a terminal and hit enter.
3) Watch through the windows while automated forklift-things sped away and returned with a pallet of your desired product.
This warehouse also had automated delivery carts. Like a golf cart that followed lines painted on the ground to deliver product around the warehouse. I was told that they never ran over people. I think my dad rolled his eyes when the tour guide said that.
I also remember signing my name on a screen and getting a printout of it and watching industrial-strength dot matrix printers print out artwork from overtyped ASCII characters ("The Wave Of The Future!") Still have Kodak schwag pens and automatic pencils that I use.
Something I've heard attributed to Hemingway as the world's shortest novel.
"For sale: baby's shoes, never worn."
Links abound for it on Google.
Eric
As a former TechTV employee, I'm glad they are removing the name. It really brought down what I remembered about TTV. As others have noted, the purchase of TTV was all about the distribution rights. G4 wasn't that serious about the web content. At first they only wanted the last few months. We had to convince them to take it all. I still get stories from TTV-ers on the inside about how terrible it is there. Plus the Wil Wheaton expose...
And if any former TTV employees want to start it all up again, I'm still unemployed...and I still have the CVS repository on my computer.
Ahh, the old Apple! I loved the manuals. My parents still have the whole thing, but I'll swipe the manuals next time I'm home. I don't remember the names but one had a light brown color, complete with fold-out schematics and some hairy, low-level shit that impressed me even though I was only 12.
I have two nephews and I'm also thinking about how to introduce them to programming. The older one(4) can already type/send me emails. I think a take-off on a game I enjoyed as a kid would be a good introduction. Basically, you have a series of rooms guarded by evil robots (with frickin' laser beams!TM) You can reprogram your own robot to go into the room and grab the item. In the old Apple game, you had logic gates and simple sensors but I think I would change it to software/programming challenge. So you learn to make wall-hugging robots, criss-crossing robots, concentric-circle robots, etc.
Anyway, it's on the back burner. Mebbe it already exists? Ah hah, Google tells me it was "Robot Odyssey (1984, The Learning Company)" and that there is a GNU Robots. I don't know if it is easy enough for children, or for me!
I'm a sys-admin at TTV and my claim to fame is that I made the DNS change on the TechTV end that redirected all traffic to g4tv.com
AFAIK, TechTV is no more. I know it is called a merger but I think a more appropriate term here is a scavenge. Comcast bought us and G4 picked the best parts of the carcass. It definitely isn't a meeting of minds to take the best of each channel.
How about a Clark-Nova? It worked for William Burroughs, it damn well better work for you!
stay off the bug juice...
In reverse order...
3) We haven't discussed distributing our content.
2) I don't think I can legally send it out. Comcast/G4 bought us and IANAL but the content is part of what they bought. If they want to flush it down the toilet, that is their choice b/c they own it.
1) Go ahead and scrape it. Better yet, get lots of people to scrape it. Drive up the hits! Our traffic has risen the last six months. The website traffic and ad sales has been on fire. It is kinda sad to see it go...
My best memory of this whole purchase process (it has been going on for a year now) is how it was described as a 'Win-Win' situation when it finally went through...
My $0.02
I work (still) at TechTV, in the IT department. AFAIK, next to nothing from the website is being kept. I know that G4 posted a job for an Oracle DBA to transition our DB to their MS SQL. We contacted them on it and they took the job down (google cache: http://66.102.7.104/search?q=cache:E3Q1eTpUtU0J:ww w.entertainmentcareers.net/jobid.asp%3Fjcode%3D229 34+G4+DBA&hl=en )
A PHB at G4 has his blog at http://hardwarewhore.com/ Classy, no? Not hard to see that they are going to leave a big, flaming divot in the ground.
I'd love opinions from those who have been in a similar situation.
Theodore Kaczynski would probably recommend a typewriter for your situation.
Eric