Recording from multiple angles makes such legal arguments a lot trickier, particularly if the recording is periodic except for motion captures.
And maybe his kids are supervised, but he wants to watch the watcher. It's handy to know when the kids are being ignored and/or terrorized by the babysitter.
Digital recordings are often used now in criminal investigations, because the systems are becoming more reliable and higher quality than tape can do. Tape is usually limited to TV resolution at best, which is approximately equivalent to 544x372, and then that signal is interlaced, which makes it hard to get details. Digital, however, can go much higher -- 640x480 true resolution for less expensive cameras on up to 1600x1200 for the high-end units. Bandwidth constraints will normally limit things to 1024x768 or 1280x1024, but this is still a minimum of nearly four times the detail, not counting the clarity from the non-interlaced image.
Finally, you have to remember to change tapes, and storage for tapes gets expensive and inconvenient if you plan on keeping them long-term. However, a relatively small server with a couple of mirrored drives for redundancy costs under a thousand dollars and can store images months' or even years' worth of data, depending on how frequent motion captures are and how many cameras are used. It's very possible to set up a fairly complete home monitoring system for under $5000 (especially with wireless cameras), complete with recording and remote access, and with a WAP-capable phone, some of the available software allows you to check on the current status.
We tried implementing motion and ZoneMinder where I work, and while they have promise (especially ZoneMinder), they required a LOT of work to get things running properly, and even then we had some issues with the cameras. Once it was working, it was fine, but the headaches involved with the initial setup frightened off management. Most of the proprietary solutions weren't much better. Those that were relatively easy to set up had poor interfaces, and those that had decent interfaces were short on features and/or compatibility.
This is one area where there's still a lot of work to be done all around.
It's far more complex, so more things can go wrong. Putting things in orbit is more complex than it needs to be as it is. Launching two craft means nearly double the launch staff, coordinating three orbits and three spacecraft, and sending more mass into orbit than is needed. Better to send them all up as one unit, even if it's all mounted in one fairing with a manned capsule on top.
Yeah, I know what you mean. I have a lot of technical and graphical people around, but financial people? Pfft. Rich people don't have enough time to get involved in online communities.
Either that or they're smart enough to keep their damned mouths shut when it comes to money.:)
Theft of my stereo would entail direct damage to tangible property as opposed to intellectual property. That's a significant point. Someone trespassing on or in my property and removing tangible items is something the police should pursue. I'm not convinced, though, that they should be investigating piracy that is not intended to turn a profit. It's kind of a fuzzy line, and so really hard to define, because while SuprNova collected donations (and probably a fair amount of them, considering bandwidth costs), they apparently never intended to turn a profit, even though they abetted piracy on a pretty large scale. But they didn't sell the copyrighted works, which pushes it back to the civil arena in my mind.
Scripted comment spam can be an enormous PITA. I run a forum, and it's the reason that we have not only mandatory registration, but also random character strings on registration.
And this isn't nearly the bad thing most people think it is.
I'm good at what I do. But I have gaps in my knowledge that colleagues -- current and former -- can fill. I can spend six hours figuring something out, or I can spend five minutes on the phone getting the answer. Sometimes I do take the time to hack through it on my own, but when I'm on someone else's nickel, it's not fair to them. Understanding the wheel is much better than reinventing it.
Look at a good IT squad. Lots of cross-training, but everyone has their own niche that they fill especially well, and possesses knowledge that is gained only through extensive experience in that niche.
I have a friend that I trust completely. We've known each other for close to 20 years, and I've never known him to break his integrity and word of honor, and as such would be the executor of my estate (such as it is) because I don't trust my family to not fight over things. He has two keys to lockboxes (though not the keys to access the building they're in), and will soon have the second key to a safe deposit box, that will have information on what is to be done with and how to gain access to certain things should I meet an untimely end. We usually drive separately (we end up meeting at some point between our houses usually), so it would have to be something pretty severe to take us both out at the same time. Passwords will be made available to him where necessary, so that information can be obtained to pass on to my next of kin. E-mails will be made available to the people that wrote them, and not to anyone else unless specifically authorized by me. Various other tidbits have their own destinations.
Yeah, it's a little morbid, but I, too, know secrets that would hurt others if they got out to certain people, and I don't like to think about what would happen if they did just because I died.
I'm both aware of it, and arguing against it. Copyright is essentially an implied contract. You can read, listen, or play, what I write, and in exchange, you agree not to profit from it or to significantly dilute it. When a contract is broken, that's a civil matter. That's a disagreement between you and me. There's no reason to get the police involved, because their responsibility is in criminal law, providing some level of safety to the populace by enforcing laws that, for the most part, protect people and real property.
The DoJ has formed an intellectual property crimes division (CCIPS) which, depending on the focus, could and should be put to work on more serious crimes. With some of the legislation in effect and pending, copying a CD and giving it to you (presuming you lived in another state from me) would get them involved, with thousands, even tens of thousands of dollars going into the investigation.
And no, I'm not one who feels entitled to free stuff. I pay for my software, and my girlfriend complains about the songs I play over and over because I'm too lazy to buy new CDs. Those I do have I've ripped to play them at a rate I consider reasonable. I don't download cam movies, either, and when I work on others' computers, I refuse to install unlicensed software. I do, however, feel that the role of government should be limited to safeguarding the citizenry, and where there is no financial gain intended, the police should not be involved. That's pushing the burden and cost of investigation litigation onto the government in order to provide additional basis for civil litigation that almost surely would follow.
As Kaseijin states above, copyright infringement for financial gain is the criminal offense. If you make copies of the latest LotR DVD and start selling them, then you're breaking criminal law. If you make copies and pass them out, that's a civil matter.
Your point on homicide departments is a false dichotomy.
Furthermore, how would you feel if a crime were commited against you and the police told you that they had better things to do than arrest and charge the perpitrator(s)?
If they were violating my copyrights, then I wouldn't expect the police to go after them. I'd expect my lawyer to pursue them until the rights are restored and appropriate damages recovered. If my house or car is broken into, then I expect the cops to respond, but if they're busy cornering a murder suspect, then I'll cut them some slack because that's more important at the time.
Priorities matter. Getting police involved in copyright infringement cases that do not involve financial gain (or intent of financial gain, for those enterprises that go broke) is a misallocation of what are often scarce resources. There are thousands of unsolved murders, rapes and other assaults in Los Angeles, New York, Washington, Miami, and a hundred other major cities around the world. I'd rather resources be devoted to that.
There is the issue of civil vs. criminal law. Police should not, IMHO, be involved in enforcing civil law to any greater extent than ensuring compliance with court orders (sheriffs or marshals accompanying people seeking to get property returned, for example, if violence is a reasonable possibility).
Until recently, copyright law in the US was a purely civil matter (I cannot speak for other nations). While I shed no tears for the sites that have shut down whether under actual or possible threat of litigation, I do object to using the police to enforce these kinds of things. They should be working on other things related to public safety, and even in the safe cities of Europe, I'm sure there are open cases, and even cold cases, that could be worked rather than sending them to do what the lawyers should be doing.
In 2002, the Bush administration formally changed the stance of the United States government on the Second Amendment through words incorporated in filings to the Supreme Court on two gun control cases (both of which the Justices declined to hear). The stance is now that the right to keep and bear arms is an individual right, not a state right. According to the briefs:
"The current position of the United States is that the Second Amendment more broadly protects the rights of individuals, including persons who are not members of any militia or engaged in active military service or training, to possess and bear their own firearms." That right, however, continued Olson is "subject to reasonable restrictions designed to prevent possession by unfit persons or to restrict the possession of types of firearms that are particularly suited to criminal misuse." (Source)
It seems to me a lot easier to run the script, which would take a few seconds to pull back all of the information, than to come up with rules on what constitutes multiple logins for an account, searching the records for them, and then disabling them. The script for the first would be far less complicated, and less likely to ensnare a single person browsing from a couple of computers at home or at work at close to the same time.
NYT (and many others) now scour BugMeNot to kill those accounts that are posted. I suspect they do it by script a couple of times a week, as the logins don't seem to work for me after a day or two.
What you were referring to are simply subscription services. XM and Sirius offer this for $10 a month or so. Cable and satellite are more expensive because they offer more channels over an expensive network (or at least that's what they claim). If you can come up with a way to offer similar services for $10 a month over the airwaves, I imagine it would probably do pretty well.
Maybe this could be settled by opening a new market for television and radios where you have to call and pay a slight fee to activate the "uncensored" channels.
They have this already. Perhaps you've heard of cable and satellite services?
On occasion, Comedy Central plays the South Park movie, uncut, including the Saddam/Satan bedroom scene and all of the swear words. The run this after 10pm just in case, but it's still there.
Of course, you can still occasionally see some nudity on PBS stations, though they get away with it because it's artful and tastefully done, and some of the darker TV shows on the main three after 10pm would push the lines a bit before the whole Super Bowl incident.
In Michigan v. Stitz, 1990, the US Supreme Court found in a 6-3 decision that DUI checkpoints do not violate the Fourth Amendment. From the end of the opinion:
"In sum, the balance of the State's interest in preventing drunken driving, the extent to which this system can reasonably be said to advance that interest, and the degree of intrusion upon individual motorists who are briefly stopped, weighs in favor of the state program. We therefore hold that it is consistent with the Fourth Amendment."
I'm not sure what the fines are for DUI, but the numbers I usually see for arrests seem to be on the low side of things. I've never been through a DUI checkpoint, either, though I have been through a checkpoint for immigration, and I didn't really mind since there was a quick glance in the vehicle for anything that might be in the open, and a brief question on my name, where I was going, and where I was coming from. My understanding is that DUI checkpoints are similar.
As for speed traps, there are plenty of notes online about where they are. In some states, if you can prove it's a speed trap (the states have laws against them), you can get the ticket tossed out.
Slashdot Mirror
Recording from multiple angles makes such legal arguments a lot trickier, particularly if the recording is periodic except for motion captures.
And maybe his kids are supervised, but he wants to watch the watcher. It's handy to know when the kids are being ignored and/or terrorized by the babysitter.
Digital recordings are often used now in criminal investigations, because the systems are becoming more reliable and higher quality than tape can do. Tape is usually limited to TV resolution at best, which is approximately equivalent to 544x372, and then that signal is interlaced, which makes it hard to get details. Digital, however, can go much higher -- 640x480 true resolution for less expensive cameras on up to 1600x1200 for the high-end units. Bandwidth constraints will normally limit things to 1024x768 or 1280x1024, but this is still a minimum of nearly four times the detail, not counting the clarity from the non-interlaced image.
Finally, you have to remember to change tapes, and storage for tapes gets expensive and inconvenient if you plan on keeping them long-term. However, a relatively small server with a couple of mirrored drives for redundancy costs under a thousand dollars and can store images months' or even years' worth of data, depending on how frequent motion captures are and how many cameras are used. It's very possible to set up a fairly complete home monitoring system for under $5000 (especially with wireless cameras), complete with recording and remote access, and with a WAP-capable phone, some of the available software allows you to check on the current status.
We tried implementing motion and ZoneMinder where I work, and while they have promise (especially ZoneMinder), they required a LOT of work to get things running properly, and even then we had some issues with the cameras. Once it was working, it was fine, but the headaches involved with the initial setup frightened off management. Most of the proprietary solutions weren't much better. Those that were relatively easy to set up had poor interfaces, and those that had decent interfaces were short on features and/or compatibility.
This is one area where there's still a lot of work to be done all around.
It's far more complex, so more things can go wrong. Putting things in orbit is more complex than it needs to be as it is. Launching two craft means nearly double the launch staff, coordinating three orbits and three spacecraft, and sending more mass into orbit than is needed. Better to send them all up as one unit, even if it's all mounted in one fairing with a manned capsule on top.
Japan's seems to have been developed without taking out large populaces from a distance being in mind. It's not the most successful, but it is there.
Yeah, I know what you mean. I have a lot of technical and graphical people around, but financial people? Pfft. Rich people don't have enough time to get involved in online communities.
:)
Either that or they're smart enough to keep their damned mouths shut when it comes to money.
Theft of my stereo would entail direct damage to tangible property as opposed to intellectual property. That's a significant point. Someone trespassing on or in my property and removing tangible items is something the police should pursue. I'm not convinced, though, that they should be investigating piracy that is not intended to turn a profit. It's kind of a fuzzy line, and so really hard to define, because while SuprNova collected donations (and probably a fair amount of them, considering bandwidth costs), they apparently never intended to turn a profit, even though they abetted piracy on a pretty large scale. But they didn't sell the copyrighted works, which pushes it back to the civil arena in my mind.
Scripted comment spam can be an enormous PITA. I run a forum, and it's the reason that we have not only mandatory registration, but also random character strings on registration.
It's not what you know, it's who you know.
And this isn't nearly the bad thing most people think it is.
I'm good at what I do. But I have gaps in my knowledge that colleagues -- current and former -- can fill. I can spend six hours figuring something out, or I can spend five minutes on the phone getting the answer. Sometimes I do take the time to hack through it on my own, but when I'm on someone else's nickel, it's not fair to them. Understanding the wheel is much better than reinventing it.
Look at a good IT squad. Lots of cross-training, but everyone has their own niche that they fill especially well, and possesses knowledge that is gained only through extensive experience in that niche.
How many 405 spurs are there? There's an I-405 down in the Los Angeles area, too. I wonder if spurs are allowed per-state?
I have a friend that I trust completely. We've known each other for close to 20 years, and I've never known him to break his integrity and word of honor, and as such would be the executor of my estate (such as it is) because I don't trust my family to not fight over things. He has two keys to lockboxes (though not the keys to access the building they're in), and will soon have the second key to a safe deposit box, that will have information on what is to be done with and how to gain access to certain things should I meet an untimely end. We usually drive separately (we end up meeting at some point between our houses usually), so it would have to be something pretty severe to take us both out at the same time. Passwords will be made available to him where necessary, so that information can be obtained to pass on to my next of kin. E-mails will be made available to the people that wrote them, and not to anyone else unless specifically authorized by me. Various other tidbits have their own destinations.
Yeah, it's a little morbid, but I, too, know secrets that would hurt others if they got out to certain people, and I don't like to think about what would happen if they did just because I died.
Good job. You do know that by Slashdotting the phpBB.com server, you're preventing people from patching, right? :)
I'm both aware of it, and arguing against it. Copyright is essentially an implied contract. You can read, listen, or play, what I write, and in exchange, you agree not to profit from it or to significantly dilute it. When a contract is broken, that's a civil matter. That's a disagreement between you and me. There's no reason to get the police involved, because their responsibility is in criminal law, providing some level of safety to the populace by enforcing laws that, for the most part, protect people and real property.
The DoJ has formed an intellectual property crimes division (CCIPS) which, depending on the focus, could and should be put to work on more serious crimes. With some of the legislation in effect and pending, copying a CD and giving it to you (presuming you lived in another state from me) would get them involved, with thousands, even tens of thousands of dollars going into the investigation.
And no, I'm not one who feels entitled to free stuff. I pay for my software, and my girlfriend complains about the songs I play over and over because I'm too lazy to buy new CDs. Those I do have I've ripped to play them at a rate I consider reasonable. I don't download cam movies, either, and when I work on others' computers, I refuse to install unlicensed software. I do, however, feel that the role of government should be limited to safeguarding the citizenry, and where there is no financial gain intended, the police should not be involved. That's pushing the burden and cost of investigation litigation onto the government in order to provide additional basis for civil litigation that almost surely would follow.
As Kaseijin states above, copyright infringement for financial gain is the criminal offense. If you make copies of the latest LotR DVD and start selling them, then you're breaking criminal law. If you make copies and pass them out, that's a civil matter.
Your point on homicide departments is a false dichotomy.
Furthermore, how would you feel if a crime were commited against you and the police told you that they had better things to do than arrest and charge the perpitrator(s)?
If they were violating my copyrights, then I wouldn't expect the police to go after them. I'd expect my lawyer to pursue them until the rights are restored and appropriate damages recovered. If my house or car is broken into, then I expect the cops to respond, but if they're busy cornering a murder suspect, then I'll cut them some slack because that's more important at the time.
Priorities matter. Getting police involved in copyright infringement cases that do not involve financial gain (or intent of financial gain, for those enterprises that go broke) is a misallocation of what are often scarce resources. There are thousands of unsolved murders, rapes and other assaults in Los Angeles, New York, Washington, Miami, and a hundred other major cities around the world. I'd rather resources be devoted to that.
There is the issue of civil vs. criminal law. Police should not, IMHO, be involved in enforcing civil law to any greater extent than ensuring compliance with court orders (sheriffs or marshals accompanying people seeking to get property returned, for example, if violence is a reasonable possibility).
Until recently, copyright law in the US was a purely civil matter (I cannot speak for other nations). While I shed no tears for the sites that have shut down whether under actual or possible threat of litigation, I do object to using the police to enforce these kinds of things. They should be working on other things related to public safety, and even in the safe cities of Europe, I'm sure there are open cases, and even cold cases, that could be worked rather than sending them to do what the lawyers should be doing.
Most of my classrooms in high school had ~814 tiles in them (depending on how you counted partial tiles), and each tile had 316 small holes in it.
I haven't been in high school in 12 years.
In 2002, the Bush administration formally changed the stance of the United States government on the Second Amendment through words incorporated in filings to the Supreme Court on two gun control cases (both of which the Justices declined to hear). The stance is now that the right to keep and bear arms is an individual right, not a state right. According to the briefs:
"The current position of the United States is that the Second Amendment more broadly protects the rights of individuals, including persons who are not members of any militia or engaged in active military service or training, to possess and bear their own firearms." That right, however, continued Olson is "subject to reasonable restrictions designed to prevent possession by unfit persons or to restrict the possession of types of firearms that are particularly suited to criminal misuse." (Source)
It seems to me a lot easier to run the script, which would take a few seconds to pull back all of the information, than to come up with rules on what constitutes multiple logins for an account, searching the records for them, and then disabling them. The script for the first would be far less complicated, and less likely to ensnare a single person browsing from a couple of computers at home or at work at close to the same time.
NYT (and many others) now scour BugMeNot to kill those accounts that are posted. I suspect they do it by script a couple of times a week, as the logins don't seem to work for me after a day or two.
What you were referring to are simply subscription services. XM and Sirius offer this for $10 a month or so. Cable and satellite are more expensive because they offer more channels over an expensive network (or at least that's what they claim). If you can come up with a way to offer similar services for $10 a month over the airwaves, I imagine it would probably do pretty well.
Maybe this could be settled by opening a new market for television and radios where you have to call and pay a slight fee to activate the "uncensored" channels.
They have this already. Perhaps you've heard of cable and satellite services?
On occasion, Comedy Central plays the South Park movie, uncut, including the Saddam/Satan bedroom scene and all of the swear words. The run this after 10pm just in case, but it's still there.
Of course, you can still occasionally see some nudity on PBS stations, though they get away with it because it's artful and tastefully done, and some of the darker TV shows on the main three after 10pm would push the lines a bit before the whole Super Bowl incident.
In Michigan v. Stitz, 1990, the US Supreme Court found in a 6-3 decision that DUI checkpoints do not violate the Fourth Amendment. From the end of the opinion:
"In sum, the balance of the State's interest in preventing drunken driving, the extent to which this system can reasonably be said to advance that interest, and the degree of intrusion upon individual motorists who are briefly stopped, weighs in favor of the state program. We therefore hold that it is consistent with the Fourth Amendment."
I'm not sure what the fines are for DUI, but the numbers I usually see for arrests seem to be on the low side of things. I've never been through a DUI checkpoint, either, though I have been through a checkpoint for immigration, and I didn't really mind since there was a quick glance in the vehicle for anything that might be in the open, and a brief question on my name, where I was going, and where I was coming from. My understanding is that DUI checkpoints are similar.
As for speed traps, there are plenty of notes online about where they are. In some states, if you can prove it's a speed trap (the states have laws against them), you can get the ticket tossed out.
Providing the addresses of subway stations would be a security risk. If the terrorists knew where they were, they might attack them.
This information is used by radio stations, at least in Los Angeles. Exactly how they get it, I'm not sure, but it is available to them.
As opposed to gAIM and Miranda, which surely send part of the money donated to them on to the various IM companies?